sign in sign up
<<
Home , Daceton armigerum, Gregoire (chimpanzee), Karl Taylor Compton, Oliver (chimpanzee), Stenopus, The Naked Ape

APPENDIX A

On Hard Facts and Misleading Data

In an interview with Horace Freeland Judson (1979:113-114), on September 10, 1972, Francis Crick said, in part, that "people don't realize that not only can data be wrong in , it can be misleading. There isn't such a thing as a hard fact when you're trying to discover something. It's only afterwards that the facts become hard." Crick was, of course, talking about constituting an accurate model for DNA: You must remember, we were trying to solve it with the fewest possible assump• hons. .. There's a perfectly sound reason-it isn't just a matter of aesthetics or because we thought it was a nice game-why you should use the minimum of experi• mental data .... The point is that evidence can be unreliable, and therefore you should use as little of it as you can. And when we confront problems today, we're 10 exactly the same situation.

Psychologists of the breed Desmond calls "pongists," those, namely, who attempted to inculcate carefully selected specimens of four of African and Asian with variously coded symbol systems-chiefly during the last decade-have tended to ignore this sensible monition and others like it, the reasons for which have, however, been well appreciated by their more circumspect confreres. Wachtel (1980:407), for example, re• cently reiterated some of the glaring limitations of the experimental method in the behav• ioral : he explained that such strictures, "fostered both by the prevailing ideology in the field and by the exigencies of the grant process ... " as well as by "subtle biasing factors in experiments, long overlooked or minimized by experimenters ... " not merely stressed the confirmation of hypotheses, but also created problems of a substantive nature, "yielding misleading findings and one-sided conceptualizations." The enigma Desmond chose to tackle in his book can, in the end, be traced back to the existence of a dramatic but, as yet, unbridged gap between two seemingly discrepant sets of facts, which he outlines, in his vivid and readable style, in a brief opening chapter.

A review of The 's Reflexion (979) by Adrian J. Desmond. Reprinted from Reviews in Anthropology, Vol. 8 (1981).

189 190 APPENDIX A

Taking troglodytes as the paradigmatic ape species, we have come to know, in increasing detail, that, on the one hand, the fine structure and genetic organization of the chromosomes of man and are arrestingly alike-many pairs appear to be identical to a corresponding chimpanzee pair, or almost so, and such differences as are detectable are of arrangement rather than substance. The view that men and are closely related on the chromosomal level thus stands corroborated. Moreover, earlier studies have shown that nearly 99 percent of our DNA matches that of chimpanzees. These substratal facts notwithstanding, something drastic intervenes in the course of information transfer between genotype and phenotype, a differential transition most re• cently found intractable by Yunis et al. (1980: 1148): "Such a remarkable degree of similarity makes difficult a precise explanation of the large biological differences between two closely related species." The underlying impediment was recognized, in general, by Jacob and Monod twenty years ago: tissue cells do not express, all the time, all the potentialities inherent in the totality of their genes-presumably because the particular survival requirements of every species of organism are different from those of every other. As they had observed (1960:354): "According to the strictly structural concept, the genome is considered as a mosaic of independent molecular blue-prints for the building of individual cellular constituents. In the execution of these plans, however, coordination is evidently of absolute survival ." In a previous paper (Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok 1981), we have already drawn attention to the evident fact that adult apes conspicuously differ in phenotype from grown-up people and that the behavior patterns displayed by the two-notably in respect to the semiotic faculty-are separated by a profound chasm at the bottom of which must lie, as Gould (1980:45) suggested, the repressive regulation of the activity of our respective structural genes, specifically as to their timing (i.e., fetal growth rates) during the development of the central nervous system: "Our substantial overt differences in form and behavior are probably for the most part results of relatively minor genetic changes that have slowed down developmental rates in , leaving us, as adults, strikingly similar in many ways to the juvenile stages of other ." To which Gould adds (ibid.) that "we have located (perhaps properly) human uniqueness in language and abstract conceptualization, and have regarded cerebral asymmetry and some aspects of cerebral localization as its physical -and, presumably, as a direct adapta• tion in humans 'for' these traits." Whether apes display a similar asymmetry, as Gould claims (on limited evidence), or whether this is confined to the Sylvian fissure and coupled to functional dominance rather than subserving some function related to lan• guage, is an open question (cf. the remarks of Geschwind, in Caplan 1980:310-311), and really is beside the point. The burden of Desmond's book is to inquire whether man is unique or not, with specific regard to language. His conclusion falters: "Man is no longer the measure of Creation," he adjudges in the last sentence of his work (p. 244), in a portentous para• phrase of Plato's Protagoras of Abdera, which was always an untenably unbiological position of subjective idealism against which I took a firm stance in the opening pages of a recent book of my own (Sebeok 1979:1-2,26). It by no means follows, however, that faculties resembling the human language capacity have been found in any other or, indeed, any other organism whatsoever. There are several weighty reasons for this attitude of skepticism; we have reviewed many of them in successively more detailed critiques (Sebeok I 979,Chapter 5; Sebeok and Umiker-Sebeok 1980,Chapter I; Sebeok HARD FACTS AND MISLEADING DATA 191

1981, chapter 8; Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok 1979 and 1981), none of which have been, so far, gainsaid in print. These arguments stem from a careful review of all published data by the "pongists," including a heedful scrutiny of still and motion pictures, supple• mented by other sources of reliable information. Still another set of reasons derives from linguistic theory, according to which the discovery of language in other species "would constitute a kind of biological miracle" (Chomsky 1980:239). No such miracle has been revealed to have occurred. On the contrary, several prominent psychologists have now retracted their faith in the probability of achieving so wondrous an event in a reasonable timespan, if ever (representative quotations from Premack, Rumbaugh. and Terrace• each dated 1979, hence all presumably published after Desmond's manuscript was locked into type-are assembled and may conveniently be read in juxtaposition in our Postscript to Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok 1981). Ofthe majorfigures in the "chuman nature" field (Reynolds 1980:865), only the pioneering Gardners and several of their equally sanguine epigones continue to follow their so far elusive (and fearfully expensive) gleam. An irritating red herring some "pongists" and their partisans keep bringing up in their increasingly desperate debates, one which is unfortunately echoed by Desmond, is that "there exists no consensus on how exactly to define language in man" (p. 22). I deal with this false trail in Appendix II of Sebeok 1981, but the particulars are cogently and authoritatively set forth, along five different dimensions of inquiry, by, for example, Chomsky (1980, Chapter 6). One does not need very much linguistic sophistication to grasp these details, for the fundamental differences between human language and the systems taught to apes are, one can but concur with Chomsky, "clear at the most elementary level" (ibid. 239). Few linguists would disagree that the cleavage can be studied either functionally or structurally, or both, that its physical basis, though it may not be a novel attribute of Homo sapiens, is nevertheless at least quantitatively distant, and that there are both ontogenetic and phylogenetic alterities of great consequence between man and the other species. To this, I would like to add-although the matter is far too complex to be pursued, even cursorily, in this review-that much of the concep• tual confusion comes about from considering language as primarily a communicative tool (cf. ibid. 229-230). In fact, language must have evolved as an extraordinarily (in fact, uniquely) supple instrument for modeling man's in the mind (Innenwelt), this malleability being a direct consequence of the fact that, in the manner of a tinker toy, sentences have the capability of being decomposed and reconstituted in multifarious novel ways (i.e., of undergoing syntactic transformation). (This human double activity of analysis and reconstitution has been most effectively described by Bronowski [in Sebeok 1975c:2539-2559]). But, as Terrace told Desmond (and published the specifics else• where), his chimpanzee, Nim, and others-not only of these species, but of too• whose reported performances he has painstakingly analyzed, exhibited "woefully little idea of the syntactic power of sentence structure" (p. 53). If the theory of the of language to which I allude is at all on the right track, it follows that the primary modeling function acquired a secondary communicative function-usually by means of speech• only much later; this is why I join Geschwind (in Caplan 1980:313) in suspecting "that the forerunners of language were functions whose social advantages were secondary but conferred an advantage for survival. I think it possible," he continues, "that the chim• panzee may have dominance for something that is not obviously related to what we now know as language." 192 APPENDIX A

Desmond ascribes "strategic importance" to lying in apes (pp. 198-205), that is, purposeful prevarication by nonverbal means, but why he reckons this to be so remarkable a gift escapes me. Equivalent behavior has been documented, e.g., in the Arctic fox (Riippel 1969), and ample parallels observed in birds (cf. Sebeok 1976, Chapter 9. and Chapter 10 of this book). On the matter of culture, Desmond reviews critically some work of Kroeber, which he ends up characterizing as "an almost naIve determinism ... which tied culture irre• vocably to man" (p. 77). The capacity for culture has recently become a pivotal issue in the controversy over , and the problem of its evolution in now looms as a multifaceted set of puzzles concerning different ways of storing and transmitting information. and introducing novelty in the adaptive mechanisms (biological and non• biological) used. An excellent exposition of the phylogeny of culture, as far as facts are available today, is to be found in Bonner's new study (1980). This is Desmond's second major work. A British science historian. his The Hot• Blooded Dinosaurs: A Revolution in Paleontology appeared in 1975. He is exceptionally well informed, intellectually inquisitive, and. by and large, impartial in his judgments. but both of his books are constructed around a deliberately provocative central thesis: that dinosaurs. contrary to what has been generally believed, were much further along in evolution (that is, were "warm-blooded" and enjoyed high metabolic rates) than most living reptiles; that man's relation to other species, especially to the great apes, ha~ been misestimated-a miscalculation that needs to be rectified. The central thesis constitutes the books' backbone: it conveys a unity of perspective, thus enhancing readability; but it also imparts a certain inevitable rigidity of outlook. The Ape's Reflexion is. without a doubt, the most comprehensive. thoughful, lucid, well- researched ouvrage de vulgartsa• lion on the subject, far superior to Linden's (1976) breathlessly gullible Journalistic account, with which it is likely to invite closest comparison. Its rue is that it appeared just as many of the major research projects upon which Desmond erected his philosophical edifice are entering a period of melancholy twilight, and when the shape of future investigations of ape mentality has turned significantly murkier than seemed possible a decade or so ago. Seidenberg and Petitto (1981), in their acute and devastating examination of claims made on behalf of the lInguistic abilities of signing apes, remark that those who do not accept the conclusions of the ape researchers are commonly smeared with an accusation of "anthropocentric bias, an irrational attachment to belief in the 'uniqueness' of man and the inferiority of other species ... a move which. in their opinion, "trivializes the issues and does nothing to advance the debate." Desmond, alas, is not exempt from occasional recourse to this infantile tactic, which I myself have, not infrequently. experienced during question periods following lectures on the Clever Hans phenomenon and allied methodo• logical fallacies that are so notoriously rampant in this area of research. Let me. therefore. conclude this review with a quotation tinged with a distinctly avicentric bias: "We ... feel justified in stating that communication can be established not only between primates but between a primate like man and a bird .... One must have raised these large-brained birds [viz .. woodpeckers] to understand how familiarity with a bird can develop and. consequently. how communication can be possible .... And the bird's brain IS perhaps not so inferior to that of the primate" (Chauvin and Muckensturm• Chauvin 1980:121-122). APPENDIX B

Rejoinder to the Rumbaughs

It should be abundantly clear to any careful reader of our article (Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok 1981) that we did not set out to "demonstrate that language-relevant research with apes is not a proper field of study," but rather that, as a field of study, it has so far shown itself open to a number of methodological and other flaws which need further investiga• tion and correction. As far as the particular "assertions" attributed to us by Savage• Rumbaugh and Rumbaugh (1980) are concerned, some are mere fabrications, others perhaps misunderstandings. For brevity, we shall follow the Rumbaughs' sequence of points: Assertion 1: We did not recommend that "all" the results of ape-language studies be dismissed as "inconclusive." This opinion, cited by us verbatim (p. 90), is that of a leading contemporary investigator of consciousness, D. R. Griffin, who has, moreover, been a backer of the Rumbaughs' work. This quotation was used in our article as an example of the extreme reaction even a supporter of so-called ape-language research could have to the bewildering spectacle of sniping and back-biting-of which we offered ample evidence-going on among researchers in this field. It is, of course, true that disagreement among researchers is a nonnal part of science. The point we were trying to make was that ape-language researchers have attacked each other so viciously and on so many fundamental issues that it is time for a thorough reexamination of the methodologies involved and their philosophical underpinnings in order to reach a stage where the range and intensity of disagreement would penmt a more productive level of debate and, most importantly, independent replication of findings by several competing teams. Assertion 2: The Rumbaughs' failure to understand the relevance of the polar classificatory tenus apprentissage and dressage to their own training procedures reveals the curious ambiguity toward their own investigations which in general pervades the field of ape-language researches. They seem to believe that, through repeated word magic (e.g., "maximize the need and value of communication" and "teach chimpanzees the

Written in collaboratIon with Jean Umiker-Sebeok, this rejoinder is repnnted from Anthropos. Vol. 77 (1982).

193 194 APPENDIX B value and potential of communication") they can convince others that what they are doing is somehow radically different from-and. of course, superior to-animal training over many past centuries. We contend that the contemporary and historical facts speak for themselves. and call into question the Rumbaughs' exaggerated interpretations of both their training procedures and subjects' behavior. We should note that W. von Osten. much like the Rumbaughs, was convinced that he was not "training" his animal-the horse Hans-but "teaching" it. He was. he thought. merely providing the kind of situation (cf. the Rumbaughs' "manipulatmg the environ• ment" in Rumbaugh, Rumbaugh, Smith, and Lawson 1980) in which his pet's cleverness would manifest itself most easily. If the Rumbaughs choose to consider their use of food and social rewards as something more dignified than "positive enforcement" or "social cueing" it is up to them, but they should not expect the rest of us to follow suit quite as readily, especially when no one else who is directly involved in ape-language research appears ready to agree with them on this pivotal point. Assertion 3: If this ploy fails to convince their readership, the Rumbaughs usually play their trump card-computer technology-which has. at least until recently, dazzled people enough to shield their research from the same cold, hard methodological examina• tion which has proven so devastating to other ape-language projects. (we note, however, with a twinge of regret, that even D. M. Rumbaugh's computerized research with the fading star performer, , has been quietly and discreetly buried. like a poor, dis• credited relative.) The important part of any training program is what happens between the trainers and their subjects. but the Rumbaughs would have us keep our eyes on the "infallible" electronic displays rather than their primary and critical man-animal interac• tions, which tend to get quite messy. This is like giving the proverbial visitor from Mars a verbal explanation of what should take place during a soccer match and then telling it to keep staring only at the electronic scoreboard, not at the players on the field. Such a visitor would. it is true, have an accurate idea of the quantifiable results of play, but. for all it knows, the players might actually be playing rugby, not soccer. Assertion 4: As we stated in our article, the Clever Hans effect is as much a part of interactions among humans as those among other animals or between man and animal. However, this does not mean. as the Rumbaughs imply, that ape-language researchers need not pay careful attention to social cueing and refrain from making strong claims about their work until they have given this type of influence adequate consideration, which they have not. It is not enough to explain away sometimes remarkable inconsisten• cies in performance. for example, by falling back on such unexamined and undefined notions as "respect," "acceptance," and "trust." We are especially wary of the tenden• cy of ape-language researchers to glibly refer to the "rapport" or "common world expectancies" shared by ape subjects and certain trainers. What do these expressions mean in terms of concrete, observable behaviors? Assertion 5: It is, of course, too much to expect that the Rumbaughs would agree that intelligent, skilled, and conscientious persons, with no Ph.D. but years of profes• sional experience with the subtlest forms of human and animal interactions, be brought in-along with the usual academic types-as consultants to ape-language projects. After all, it is much easier for investigators to convince psychologists and linguists, who may have no practical or scientific understanding of apes, or expertise in human nonverbal REJOINDER TO THE RUMBAUGHS 195 communication, than someone who has spent a lifetime dealing with the categories of behavior pertinent to their research (cf. Sebeok and Rosenthal 1981). The Rumbaughs' rhetoric clearly demonstrates the social prejudices which contribute to their rejection of our recommendation. Absurdly, they have added to our list of categories of non-academic observers "gurus" and "psychics," neither of which we ever mentioned, and dismiss all non-academics, as a group, as unqualified and, worse, so moronic and superstitious as to agree to be part of a "witch-hunt" (one of their oft• repeated epithets, hurled at their critics). Finding it easier to focus on stage magicians and thus to appeal to academic snobbery, they conveniently ignore the fact that we also suggested that review panels be diversified by the addition of a number of experts who have the proper scientific credentials but in areas of study not usually considered "rele• vant" to ape-language research, and, furthermore, that these panels be given considerably more control over site visits. By insinuating that we advocate a witch-hunt, they also steer attention away from the fact-in a vulgar ploy, called "the moving target" -that it was precisely the main conclusion of our article that serious scientific attention be paid to the issue of the Clever Hans effect in ape-language research. Their own proposal that a scientific study of this be made somehow has a disingenuous ring when they keep repeating the demonstrated falsehood, in the face of all evidence to the contrary and without presenting any new data, that their research is carried out "under conditions that preclude experimenter cueing." Assertion 6: It will be evident to those readers who managed to remain awake through another numbing repetition of the well-known (but little understood) description of the Rumbaughs' work with Austin and Sherman that the Rumbaughs have presented not one new shred of evidence that would counter any of our earlier questions about their methodology. They simply will not comprehend that it is possible that their experimenters and apes may be paying attention to any signs other than those they themselves have intended them to heed. It does not occur to them, for example, that an experimenter might not always wait until an electronic key is touched to begin moving his or her hand toward the intended tool (or provide some other sort of subtle cue), or that the animal who does not watch the box being baited could respond to acoustic cues inadvertently given off while the box is being baited, and so forth, ad nauseam.

The Rumbaughs have also completely missed our point concerning their "control condition," which was that experimenters can cue animals to fail just as well as to succeed, given the proper motivations. Rather than clarifying things for us, we now have an additional question for the Rumbaughs: If, as they state, "The real-world knowledge• state of the chimpanzees and the experimenters is identical in all test conditions," what does the word "blind" mean in their "control tests," in which they claim experimenters were "blind"? That the computer is probably blind we can imagine, but if experimenters knew what tools were in the box, in what way were they "blind"? What this field does not need is more confusing and inconsistent descriptions of experimental conditions, bracketed by endless repetitions of unsubstantiated assertions about fool-proof controls which preclude cueing (Savage-Rumbaugh 1981). Assertion 7: It is perhaps because they are not familiar with animal behavior in circuses, which they hold in such low esteem, that the Rumbaughs give such lofty 196 APPENDIX B interpretations to their chimpanzees' performances. Comparable animal acts, performed before audiences for the purpose of entertainment, are more easily perceived as cute tricks. As we stated in our article (ef. also Sebeok 1976, Chapter 8), chimpanzees, like many animals much lower on the phylogenic scale, have the ability to use symbols as tools to achieve certain goals, and they can interpret the symbols displayed by other animals, including man, as mdications of that other animal's desires or intentions. Austin and Sherman were presented with a number of desirable rewards and pains• takingly trained to manipulate human symbols in order obtain them, first with a human partner and then with each other. Animal A sees a certain object placed in a box and is trained to push a key, which stands for that object. Animal B sees a certain key light up and is trained to pick up the object with which the key has been associated in training and hand it to A. Even overlooking the abundant opportunities for cueing by both the experi• menters and the animals themselves, it is difficult to understand in what way such behavior is qualitatively different from simple association of objects and symbols. Lest their readers come to such an impertinent conclusion, the Rumbaughs offer as "proof" that their experiments have demonstrated that chimpanzees have an •• understanding of the nature and purpose of inter-individual communications not shown by pigeons," the fact that, on occasion, when animal B was slow in picking up the correct object, animal A would "help" by pointing to or touching the object himself. How, one might ask, does this differ from a pet owner's not uncommon experience of having his dog bring him its leash when its special "Take me for a walk" signal has for some reason been repeatedly disregarded? The Rumbaughs' anecdote does not prove that Austin and Sherman have any greater awareness of the implications of their masters' electronic version of ping-pong than would pigeons. It is not unreasonable to ask for stronger evidence of ape-language than that so far presented by the Rumbaughs. We look forward to genuine results, in particular analysis of the videotape they mention, especially if the Rumbaughs permit outside experts to exam• ine unedited copies as well as to conduct interviews with everyone involved in the taping process. We also eagerly await detailed descriptions of the "many" control procedures the Rumbaughs now claim that they have followed in all their work with Austin and Sherman but which, so far, they-regrettably-have omitted from published accounts of their work or which, if mentioned, are brought into question by illustrations or explana• tions of other experimental conditions. Assertion 8: The Rumbaughs have failed to grasp the nch implications of the fundamental biological concept of homology, accurately and independently delineated, at the tum of the century, by C. O. Whitman and O. Heinroth. Ethological research is, in fact, predicated on the assumption that certain sequences of behaviors may be just as homologically criterial in defining characteristics of species and higher taxonomic units as are the morphological characteristics used in comparative anatomy. Practically no one since Bishop Wilberforce-perhaps excepting only the fringe group, called "cre• ationists"-has denied that homologies exist between Homo sapiens and Pan troglodytes. on various levels. This fact notwithstanding, something drastic intervenes in the course of information transferred from genotype to phenotype, which is far from explicable in crude terms of differential brain size. Yunis et al. (1980: 1148) phrased the key question thus: "Such a remarkable degree of [genotypic) similarity makes difficult a precise explanation of the large biological [read: phenotypic] differences between two REJOINDER TO THE RUMBAUGHS 197 closely related species" (see also Appendix A of this book). The largest biological difference between man and chimpanzee is, of course, that we-hale human adults-do have language, while the apes do not. Language is the consequence of a superbly adaptive set of interrelated mutations produced by evolution. It is unlike anything else in the known world. It has no homologous counterpart in life on earth-none. Many prominent eth• ologists concur; to cite only one authoritative opinion, Nobel laureate K. Lorenz recently affirmed: I share [the] opinion that syntactic language is based on a phylogenetlc program evolved exclusively by humans .... Doubts have been cast over the results obtained by A. and B. Gardner, D. Premack, and others m their experiments with anthropoid apes which, under the normal conditions of their life in the wild, give no mdicatlon of possessing syntactic language. (1981 :342)

And M. Hunt, in his excellent new book on the cognitive sciences, remarks: For a while, some psychologists-and many lay persons-believed that a major discovery had been made, namely, that apes, while they cannot produce spoken words, have semantic and syntactic abilities similar to, though smaller than, those of human beings .... Yes, it was dazzling-and, it now seems. a great exaggeration. Among psychologists working with apes, and others who have studied the evidence. serious doubts have cropped up in the last year or so. (1982:229f.)

Much, much more could be written--for instance, about the Rumbaughs' demon• strably insincere references to the media, which they have routinely tried to manipulate and shamelessly exploit to their advantage (there are journalists they do like, and those they don't), or their dramatic severance of relationships with many of their erstwhile collaborators who had expressed reservations about this line of research-were our space limitations less stringent. These matters will be discussed elsewhere. For the moment, two brief remarks will have to suffice in conclusion, the first suggested by the Rumbaughs' title: while "ape-language research" may indeed be surviving in a few restricted quarters, all is far from well! This is clear from the preceding sample quotations, which could be many times multiplied (see, for example. Martin Gardner's assessments in his splendid compendium [1981:381-408], and his article on "How Well Can Animals Converse?" [1982a]) And, finally, the heart of the argument between us can be epitomized by two further quotations. The earlier one dates from the Renaissance, formulated by the polymath, Leonardo da Vinci, who helped usher in the modem scientific epoch: "Experience never errs; it is only your judgments that err by promising themselves effects such as are not caused by your experiments." The second quotation, specifically directed to the project of the Rumbaughs, was written by the leading animal psychologist of our times, H. Hediger (1980: 138), who, in tum, repeats a classic caution often articulated by the late great zoologist of Freiburg, O. Koehler: Fiir besonders gefahrlich halte ich die ... Grundemstellung, nach der bestimmte Resultate erwartet werden .... Diese Einstellung steht im Widerspruch zu der be• rechtlgten Forderung von O. Koehler. die laute!: "Versuehsleiter sollen nieht zum voraus glauven, was die Versuchsergebnisse sie lehren sollen." APPENDIX C

Amplification to Gopnik

We find ourselves in the gratifying position of complete concurrence with our reviewer (Gopnik 1983) on all matters of substance, and do not wish to abuse the Editor's generous invitation to submit a rejoinder. This notwithstanding, we do welcome the opportunity to amplify or clarify a few points raised by Professor Myrna Gopnik, especially insofar as these have not yet been dealt with by us elsewhere (to wit, Appendix B, this book; Sebeok 1981b; Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok 1981). The reviewer perceives "some notable gaps in [our] collection" (p. 273), singling out the reported achievements of David Premack (with Pan) and Francine Patterson (with ). Her characterization of Premack as "one of the most careful and thorough researchers in this area" is fraught with undesigned irony, spotlighted by his own the• atrical self-disclosure in 1979 (i.e., one year preceeding the appearance of our book): As early as 1970, I essentially quit concentratmg on the attempt to operalIonally analyze some aspects of human language, develop training procedures for them and instill them in the ape, because it was clear to me that the accomplishments of which the ape was capable With regard to human-type language were very slight. . Early demonstrations and misinterpretations, or ovennterpretalIons, of language-like perfor• mance in apes led many people to conclude that the differences between ape and man were enormously less than had been contended. However, I never took language-like performances to signal a reduction in the differences between man and other species. I don't believe that the principle of biological continuity implies such a reduction. (Premack, in dialogue with Chomsky 1979:8) What we find embarrassingly operose is to reconcile this recantation with the fact that Premack's major contribution to the subject, his Intelligence in Apes and Man (as well as Ann Premack's popular version, Why Chimps Can Read), were both published in 1976, no less than six years after he claims that he had abandoned his previously trumpeted

Written in collaboration with Jean Umlker-Sebeok, this amplification of Gopnik's review of Sebeok and Umiker-Sebeok's Speaking of Apes (1980) is reprinted from the Journal of Social and BiologIcal Structures, Vol. 6 (1983) 198 AMPLIFICATION TO GOPNIK 199 hypotheses about the propensity of apes for "human-type language." We also wish to call attention to H. S. Terrace's devastating dissection of D. Premack's book, included on pp. 385-405 of Speaking of Apes, which incontrovertibly exposes this author as anything but "careful" or "thorough." Gopnik, alas, nowhere alludes to Terrace's many cogent strictures, which, so far as we can trace, have never been rebutted. Patterson's status is another matter. Some preliminary animadversions on her bizarre claims appeared in the Review of Books, December 4, 1980; these were fully reprinted by Martin Gardner (1981 :Chapter 38), with a Postscript added (cf. Gardner's comprehensive review article, "How Well Can Animals Converse?" [1982a], as well as Sebeok's "Once in Love With Amy" [Appendix D, this book]). In addition to the two lacunae singled out by Gopnik, we also omitted any discussion of investigations, with parallel aims, focusing on apes of the Pongo, which be• gan-and failed dismally-at the turn of the century; as Furness (1916:290) lamented in his lecture to the American Philosophical Society, "I regret that I am forced to admit, after several years of observation of anthropoid apes, that I can produce" not the faintest rays of the hoped-for linguistic attainments in his animals. There still do, in fact, exist several modest projects involving . One is embodied in Keith Laidler's eccen• tric book, with its central claim that "the chimpanzee's vocal linguistic achievements pale into insignificance against [his ] Cody's 'language'" (1980:178). Two other attempts, presently ripe for public assessment, feature two young male orangutans, one in California (Bulan), another in Tennessee (), being trained to understand and produce what is artlessly referred to as "sign-language" (cf. Maple 1980:210-212). There are yet others, for example, a Premack-inspired experiment by Gary Shapiro, very little information about which-one wonders why-has been made public (Sebeok 198Ib:169,300). Since all attempts, hitherto, to inculcate in any ape the remotest trace of linguistic elements have uniformly dwindled, it might be worth mentioning, in passing, that cred• ulous investigators are now increasingly turning-or, more exactly, returning-to other, cheaper models, such as East African tortoises, French woodpeckers, and an African Grey parrot (Sebeok 198Ib:170-17I; Page 1982), as well as attempting to resuscitate a covey of clever Cetaceans. The continued outbreaks of such delusions may conceivably generate worthwhile commentaries on human aspirations and gullibility, and will doubtless whip up feverish media interest, but are scarcely of scientific concern. But let us get back to our apes. We confess to having been startled by Gopnik's epithet portraying us as being "evangelical," which can only mean "appealing to author• ity," especially of a religious kind. She sent us scurrying back to our text to check whether we were indeed guilty of having committed the fallacy of argumentum ad verecundiam to help win assent to our conclusions, but were quickly reassured that such a representation is not at all borne out; to the contrary, we devoted a separate section (pp. 29-36) to the abuses of authority in this context (a theme which likewise emphatically recurs in Sebeok 1981b: Chapter 7). Gopnik perceives her responsibility to "try to dispassionately sort out the evidence and arguments on both sides," which perfectly accords with our own intent and pro• cedure (p. 274). Further, she asks: "What is at stake?" The red herring that she calls the human "uniqueness claim" is certainly not; one of us has, for example, devoted a lengthy study to show that-contrary to received opinion-man's nonverbal arts, his aesthetic 200 APPENDIX C impulses, are rooted in his animal ancestry (ibid.: Chapter 9). In the essay under review we tried to expose the shabby experimental methods endemic to this field of research, which seems to be goaded by a pervasive tendency for self-deception, and, in marginal cases, worse. We have detected numerous methodological errors-the Clever Hans fall• acy (Sebeok 1979: Chapter 5; Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok 1981), which she singles out, being but one-and grossly embroidered interpretations of reported data. How many times does one have to be reminded of Isaac Newton's beautiful expression (in Book III of the Principia): "For nature is pleased with simplicity, and affects not the pomp of superfluous causes"? In other words, why introject language, a deus ex machina, as it were, into situations which can be adequately explained in terms of ancient, well-under• stood, and oft-tested training operations? "What is at stake'?" is certainly a legitimate question, but there arc others, equally compelling. After about a decade and a half of sustained scrutinies for the most evanes• cent whiff of language behavior in the world of the great apes, is it unreasonable to ask: have any fresh theoretical principles been uncovered? have any novel insights been gained to illuminate the origin and evolution of man? have any practical applications been tendered in exchange for the hefty sums lavished on such investigations by the patiently munificent agencies of our people? The answers are: none, none, and none. Perhaps what is at stake is mere vainglory, and a seemingly insatiable hunger for media recognition. Professor Gopnik, who is a resident of Canada, may contemplate such interrogatories in detached tranquility, but it is we who have to pay the bills. It is fascinating to realize the fact that in practically no other country have investigations of the sort at issue here been publicly-or, for that matter, privately-funded. True, in (Kawai 1978- 1979:548), a study was launched, under the direction of Kiyoko Murofushi, at the Inuyama branch of Kyoto University, "on language acquisition in chimpanzees," utiliz• ing (roughly) the Rumbaugh paradigm; but, by April 1980, when one of us revisited this facility, the project was already in the process of dismantlement, because it was recog• nized for what it was: a costly washout. We regret that Professor Gopnik-herself an accomplished linguist-chose not to take us to task for neglecting to explore in our essay the pivotal and consequential question: what is language? The excuse we declared was that Chomsky did just that in his adroit chapter, "Human Language and Other Semiotic Systems" (1980:429-440). Since our book appeared, however, we have come to increasingly appreciate Just how profound a muddle there exists among the "pongists" -no less than among the laity-about the nature of language. For instance, there is a pervasively infestive confusion between the notions "communication" and "language." Although many human beings-but by no means all-can and do habitually communicate by verbal means, language certainly did not evolve as a communicative tool; it originated as a modeling device of a very special kind, in the sense encompassed by Jakob von Uexkiill's Umweltlehre als Theorie der Zeichenprozesse (Sebeok 1979: Chapter 10; cf. Chomksy 1980:229-230). A second irksome mix-up is between "language" and various expressions thereof, such as "speech" or "signing" (as among segments of the deaf population). It should be obvious to scientists that the appearance of language in Homo sapiens, no more than 300,000 years ago, must have long anteceded its social (i.e .. communicational) uses, which unevadably entail the co-presence of a productive () ability and an mterpretive (decodmg) AMPLIFICATION TO GOPNIK 201 ability, because either capacity would be abortive without the other. (These brief observa• tions have been expanded, and now constItute Chapter 2 of this book.) Finally, we wish to comment on Professor Gopnik's circumscription that we "have not demonstrated that ... cueing did, in fact, take place" (p. 279). At no time, in any of our half a dozen statements on this subject, did we put forth such an outlandish claim. The goals of our work-clearly and forcefully stated, among other places, on page 55 of our book-were to call for "extraordinary caution and attention to possible methodological pitfalls," and "the creation of ever more carefully controlled blind tests, on the one hand, and the observation and experimental manipulation of a full complement of semiosic behaviors, on the other." The aim of our book was precisely to provide a sound rationale and encouragement for continued empirical investigations of the actual progress of in• teractions between man and ape in the course of training and testing sessions. We are as aware as Professor Gopnik must be of the fallacy of the argumentum ex silentio in the logic of scientific discourse. APPENDIX 0

Once In Love with Amy

Rework King Solomon's Mines, the famous "faithful but unpretending record of a re• markable adventure" dedicated "to all the big and little boys who read it," mix in some modem ingredients-hocus-pocus computer gadgetry; Amy, a counterfeit gorilla that habitually uses sign language, yet "understands most human speech" and "can tell when you're lying and she doesn't like it"; and a mutant gorilla species, as lethal as it is biologically unlikely, a troop of "attack animals, trained for cunning and viciousness"• and you get a commercially viable screenplay (the movie rights were, in fact, sold before Crichton wrote the first word of ), if hardly more than a pastime novel. In brief, Congo is a machine-tooled adventure story, cast in the lurid spirit and manner of H. Rider Haggard. The principal characters are a cardboard trio of human protagonists, pitted against the murderous band of gorillas; and the mediating "bilingual" chimera, Amy. These figures are programmed to shove the plot forward, in conflict with a host of human, animal, and other obstacles, at rapid pace; but the story is of a depressing dottiness characteristic, alas, of the kind of science fiction which is centered on semiotic problems. There is nothing more significant at stake in this piece of fiction than the doctrine of verisimilitude: Aristotle's concept of to eikos, and the closely related notion of the imitation of nature. Following Chapter 9 of the Poetics, it is Crichton's business not' 'to tell what happened but the kind of things that would happen. " The impossible is allowa• ble, so long as it is convincing; and the implausible permissible, since (as Aristotle says in Chapter 25) it is probable that some improbable actions will occur. Crichton is licensed to offend against what is known to be known if, and only if, there is some overriding artistic reason for him to do so. Ursula K. Le Guin laid down a pertment principle of science fiction in ruling that the writer "must not flout the evidence of science." In some quarters, this is known as the "automatic translator" gimmick: if you have to communi-

This reView, based in its present form on the original manuscnpt. appeared, under the title •• Amy and the Apes, " in the Times Literary Supplement, on July 17. 1981.

202 ONCE IN LOVE WITH AMY 203 cate with aliens-or animals-in a hurry, use the Universal Translator, an AD-HOC magic coding machine. Amy incarnates one variant of this over-used device. Crichton has obviously conducted some research into communication, both animal and electronic. He appends four pages of authentic references on these subjects, as well as on aspects of West African ethnology, to say nothing of such arcane matters as side• looking airborne . But it is not clear whether he can evaluate objectively what he claims to have read, and he has not read nearly enough. True, A. F. Dixson's The Natural History o/the Gorilla appeared too late for him to take it into account, but Crichton either misunderstood or preferred to suppress the conclusions in Herbert S. Terrace's works, some of which he does cite, and has completely ignored the by now voluminous and devastatingly critical literature showing tbat loose talk about ape-talk is based at once on naive theoretical preconceptions and pathetically poor experimental procedures, the re• sults of which were very largely perpetuated in distorted form and so massaged into the popular consciousness by dint of media hype. It is not often that a thriller, such as this, gets reviewed in the austere pages of The Wall Street Journal, but Raymond Sokolov went to that trouble in this year's January 14 issue, under the title, "Separating Fact from Fiction. " Mr.Sokolov was indignant because Crichton "blatantly falsified a basic fact, knowing that he does so," and thereby "shows contempt for the public and for his own work. He cheats at his own game. " Like Sokolov, I was upset by having caught Crichton out as either a sloppy researcher or a perverse prevaricator: once he lets you down on so crucial a figure as Amy, on whose linguistic skill the basic plot hinges, how can you trust his veracity about the rest of the scientific and technological minutiae which he heaps on and on, page after page? These details, in the aggregate, should add up to a convincing, comprehensive view of his imaginary world, but, for me, the magic was dispelled with the early introduction of Amy: not because she is impossible-although that she is all right-but because she is so plainly a phony. What, then, are Amy's functions in this book? She accompanies an American expe• dition back to Africa-where she was born, although she was linguistically trained (where else?) in the California Bay Area-in search of a diamond mine (the MacGuffin) in the lost City of Zinj (which Haggard fans will promptly recognize as the Place of Death). Control of the mine will alter the future of warfare. The killer apes that guard the diamonds of Zinj must be got in touch with. Amy serves as a convenient intermediary. She is also one of two heroines in the book. The other, Dr. Ross, is a "genuine mathematical prodigy," "logical to a fault," young and attractive, but glacial and ruthless. Amy indicates on first meeting Karen "No like woman no like Amy no like go away away"" Amy has "many distinctly 'feminine' traits" -she is coy, responds to flattery, is preoccupied by her appearance .. loves make-up, and is fussy about the color of the sweaters she wears in the winter; above all, she prefers men to women. The rela• tionship of the two females continues to be tense, but the antagonism becomes strangely muted as the journey progresses into the heart of darkness. At the conclusion of Congo, Karen joins the US Geological Survey, Amy joins a Zaire gorilla troop (regulation, not outlaw), and the romance ends with her bearing an offspring whom she appears to be busy teaching sign language in the jungle. A story-teller may, as Aristotle pronounced, depart from the representation of reality 204 APPENDIX D if (among other considerations) he follows .. common opinion." In our society, common opinion tends to be molded by the media, to which Crichton is closely attuned. According to the media, some apes-as well as dogs, dolphins, maybe even horses-can be trans• ubstantiated from the baser metal of which speechless creatures are thought to be com• posed into one endowed with the golden virtue which language capacity alone is widely believed to vouchsafe. In the authentic world of science, as opposed to alchemy, no such transmutation has ever taken place, contrary to what you may imagine you have learned from doctored films shown on TV, or read in magazines such as Penthouse (see the November 1980 issue, showing in the nude), or heard indirectly from a credulous neighbour. Consequently, a literary form has come forth, stemming from an ancient tradillon which conjures up talking animals as props in order to actuate the author's narrative intent; Harvey, Mary Coyle Chase's six-foot pooka rabbit, interacted verbally with and thus delineated the character of, only one figure in the play so called (\ 944), but remained inaudible to the rest of the cast and, of course, to the beguiled audience. The genre I have in mind took a decisive tum towards science fiction, beginning perhaps with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, whose endearing monster rediscovered the endless delights of semiotics: "I found that these people Lin the shepherd's cottage] possessed a method of communicating their experience and feelings to one another by articulate sounds. I per• ceived that the words they spoke sometimes produced pleasure or pain, smiles or sadness, in the minds and countenances of the hearers. This was indeed a godlike science, and I ardently desired to become acquainted with it." Possession of this godlike science is typically imputed to whatever species of animal is currently the focus of public attention. Thus, throughout the 1960s, porpoises held the centre of the stage, as in Robert Merle's astutely framed The Day of the Dolphin (\ 967; later Hollywood ground the dolphin into a dog). In the 1970s, into the present decade, and who knows how far into the rest of the century, the chosen species have become African great apes. Peter Dickinson's elegant detective story, The Poison Oracle, appearing in 1974, set a milestone in the development of chatty chimps, as did, in quite another mode and mood, T. Coraghessan Boyle's short story, "Descent of Man," at once foul and pulverizing. The first major garrulous gorilla was a Uganda-born male, devised by John Goulet, for his wondrously imagined and brilliantly executed roman a clef, Oh's Profit (1975; retitled The Human Ape for the paperback trade). Goulet's plot is at least as entertaining as Crichton's, but there are also issues of much consequence at stake, among them human nature and the nature of language. The story of Oh is profoundly moving: it grips while it instructs. Where Amy makes a mockery of authenticity, Oh is true to the essentiality of man. It is a pity that Crichton's gorilla is bound to prevail over Goulet's, and that most people will continue to credit the factitious over the real. As Oh decides midway through Goulet's underestimated novel, "from now on he would not willingly misuse language, lest it misuse him." APPENDIX E

L'Education" Sentimentale

The Education of Koko belongs to a still accreting genre of literary discourse devoted to "language-endowed" apes. This is encountered in three main although overlapping types (excluding books written for children, such as the outstanding series by Bettyann Kevles): avouched works of fiction, which, in their striving for realism, more or less cunningly interlace the researched with the fabricated; accounts advertised as documentary, but that are, more often than not, peppered with a soupr;on of invented data here, tempered by suppressed information there, embroidered by cute illustrations throughout, and embel• lished by overpainted interpretations overall; and then there is the interesting but rather uncommon third category of true confessions. Considered as fiction, the Patterson-Linden book measures up to neither of two recent novels about signing gorillas: John Goulet's brilliantly poetic roman a clef, The Human Ape (originally, Oh's Profit), or Michael Crichton's elaborately pseudo-factual photoplay thriller, Congo, the anthropoid heroine of which was loosely fashioned after Koko (TLS, July 17, 1981). Proposed as a transcription of reality, the memoirs of Koko rate far beneath the trio of classics, all of which record business consummated before 1950, by Nadie Ladygina Kohts (Infant Ape and Human Child), Winthrop N. and Louise A. Kellogg (The Ape and the Child), and Catherine H. Hayes (The Ape in Our House). This recountal completes a new troika of captive great ape sagas, arguably accomplishing for Gorilla what Maurice K. Temerlin achieved, in 1975, for Pan (in , the name of a chimpanzee now out on parole in Gambia), and Keith Laidler, in 1980, for Pongo (in The Talking Ape). One salient feature these three recent books share is the crudely anthropopathic character of their respective protagonists. All six of the aforementioned roughly comparable chronicles, as well as Ann J. Premack's Why Chimps Can Read, differ from the third type of the genre, so far uniquely exemplified by Herbert S. Terrace's Nim (the name of another chimpanzee, lately down-

A review of The Education of Koko (1982) by Francine Patterson and Eugene Linden. This review, based in its present form on the original manuscript, appeared, under the title "The Not So Sedulous Ape," in the Times Literary Supplement, on September 10, 1982.

205 206 APPENDIX E graded to a laboratory subject for tests of a new hepatitis vaccine), with its volte-face conclusion that there is no evidence at all that apes can either generate or interpret sentences. This hardly surprising resolution earned Terrace such epithets as "muddle• headed" (Patterson), "apostate" (Linden), and worse. Terrace's results are, however, in perfect conformity with the long held judgment of informed linguists, from Miiller (1889) to Noam Chomsky. They accord equally well with the view of responsible eth• ologists, such as , who had declared, in 1978, "that syntactic language is based on a phylogenetic program evolved exclusively by humans," and that' 'anthropoid apes ... give no indication of possessing syntactic language. " Too, the eminent Bristol neuropsychologist, Richard Gregory, concluded in 1981 that apes do not exhibit either "human language or intellectual ability," and wisely admonished: "There are so many experimental difficulties and possibilities of the animals picking up clues from the experi• menters, given unwittingly, that extreme caution is essential." Gregory is, of course, alluding here to the Clever Hans phenomenon, a fallacy by which Koko's entire ten-year curriculum has been arrantly nag-ridden. Writing specifically about Koko, , the most astute animal behaviorist of our time observed, in his latest book, "Es ist ... meine Uberzeugung, dass in diesen Experimenten der Kluge-Hans-Fehler nach 75 lahren erneut Triumphe feiert." Maple and Hoff, in their standard reference work, Gorilla Behavior (1982:220), justly espy that "observer bias seems to be inherent to sign lan• guage studies," adding, "Certainly Patterson's gorilla study can be criticized along the same lines." Readers acquainted with The Education of Henry Adams might be tempted to leap to the conclusion that the book under review is a numinously endowed gorilla's autobiogra• phy, but the ability of Koko to express language in written form is not as yet included among the several other bizarre claims made on her behalf. But please don't scoff: in 1968, one of Thomas Mann's daughters, Elizabeth Borgese, advanced, in all seriousness, the even more outlandish proposition that her dog, Arli, learned to compose poetry on an Olivetti typewriter; of this English setter's work, a well-known critic of modern poetry had purportedly written: "the poems are charming. I think he has definite affinity with the 'concretist' groups in . Scotland, and Germany. Has he been in touch with them?" (A specimen of this last group, "d do vvar," has been interpreted as an antiwar poem!) Since we are repeatedly informed of Koko's predilection for versifying, does it seem unreasonable to expect her to transmute her alleged talent for rhyming (on the order of "You lip sip" and "bread red head") into parallelisms, not just in evanescent gestures (i.e., Ameslan), but in a more perduring visual mode, script? Apart from Koko's alleged poetic gifts, much is made of her aptitude for lying, which, according to the authors, "of course, is one of those behaviors that shows the power of language" (p. 18). Here, however, lurks a terminological confusion, one that, furthermore, begs the question. Many kinds of animals-the most remarkable case on record is that of the Arctic fox, Alopex lagopus-give, or give off, deceptive messages, in a word, prevaricate. But a lie must, by definition, be "stated," which Koko simply cannot do. Since, as Philip Lieberman has cogently argued (Lieberman 1975), nonhuman pri• mates "could not produce human speech even if they had the neural devices," how. precisely, can Koko be said to talk? Well, she is declared to be "adept at typing" on a keyboard-computer assembly linked to a voice synthesizer by pressing buttons on a sturdy L'EDUCA TlON SENTIMENT ALE 207 console. It is with genuine regret that one learns, however, that since the "synthesizer has frequently malfunctioned, and although we have collected an enormous amount of data, we have not yet had time to analyze Koko's 'spoken' language in detail" (p. 110). (In plaintext, this citation means that, since Miss Patterson's connection with Stanford Uni• versity h.IS been unilaterally severed, she no longer enjoys free access to its computers.) The first-person-singular narrator of this book represents a coalescence of two hu• mans into a single persona: Francine Patterson, a tongue-tied psychologist, Koko's surro• gate mother and pedagogue, whose voicf:-considering her confession that she felt that her time "would be much better spent conversing with the gorillas" -is ventriloquially articulated by Eugene Linden, a wrestler-turned-journalist, perhaps best known to the public for his Apes, Men, & Language (1974, 1981), surely the most gullible, as well as defensively emotion-laden, popular account of attempts at linguistic communication with any of our collateral ancestral species so far published (particularly when contrasted with the much more sophisticated and fairly balanced report by Adrian Desmond, The Ape's Rejlexion (1979), and even in comparison with Ted Crail's Apetalk & Whalespeak (1981), which whiffles away, trying to offend no one). A quotation attributed to Koko epigraphically opens the book, and, at the very same time, epitomizes its obstinate dottiness: "Fine animal gorilla" -this being her reply to the question, "Are you an animal or a person?" This exchange implies that Koko rediscovered the Linnaean system of classification and nomenclature. To the contrary, as Hediger has patiently explained, the string quoted is a purely human product that having been fed to the gorilla was regurgitated b)' her, and then reinterpreted as a novel sentence that seemingly originated in her mind. It is a typical illustration of what happens when the Pathetic Fallacy and the Clever Hans Fallacy cross-fertilize one another, and the resulting hybrid is further contaminated by what the psychologist Paul E. Mehl, in 1956, and many others since, have dubbed the Barnum Fallacy-a phrase recalling P. T.'s circuses, the popularity of which were due to the fact lhat they offered "a little something for every• body." The Barnum Effect is an indispensable tool employed by a wide variety of "psychics" and kindred confidence men and women in so-called cold (or dynamic) readings (so productively studied by Ra)' Hyman); the Fallacy involves, in the case at point, treating the gorilla as an intentional message source rather than a mere channel through which messages originating with Patterson or her associates are, in specular fashion, reflected back to the interrogator. The operator typically ascribes to the animal an understanding of "a number of principles that are the foundation of what we call abstract thought" (p. 129). It has not escaped the notice of several reviewers that Patterson and Linden are addicted to the use of ploys familiar from parapsychology, such as keeping clear of skeptics, since the presence of a skeptic tends to ruin experimental results. Compare this with the authors' belief "that one cannot really understand the mental workings of other animals or bring them to the limits of their abilities unless one first has true rapport with them" (p. 211). The obverse of this claim is that the intimacy between Patterson and her beloved Koko has hopelessly overclouded her scientific objectivity and judgment; (her coauthor's stake in this enterprise-as well as, of course, his bond of personal relationship with the gorilla-is clearly of a different order). It might be instruc• tive here to recall one of Freud's most famous axioms: "The doctor should be opaque to his patients and, like a mirror, should show them nothing but what is shown to him." Miss Patterson's project does differ rather sharply in one respect from all other 208 APPENDIX E similarly aimed investigations of ape language propensity conducted in the (the only major project abroad, on language acquisition in chimpanzees launched by the Primate Research Institute of Kyoto University, ingloriously petered out when its unpro• ductivity became obvious). While millions of dollars in federal funds were being squan• dered on the futile search for language in chimpanzees and orangutans, Patterson con• tinued her work, without a proper institutional base. with the support of private sources, including a large, so-called "nonprofit" commercial enterprise, supplementing her in• come by minor grants from small foundations. This lack of public succor has exacted a heavy price, including a warped perspective, a lack of receptivity to well intentioned criticism, and a desperate reaching out for media recognition (of which this unfortunate book represents but one example). The need to peddle her product through magazines (National Geographic, Penthouse), and grotesque television shows, is a tragedy for a promising young scientist with aspirations to sainthood; she has been quoted as remarking that her patron saint is St. Francis, who spoke with the animals, and that as a child she thought: Oh how neat to do that. If I were a saint, that's the talent I'd want. At just about the time when Oskar Pfungst was completing his quest in Berlin for sanity in the matter of Clever Hans-which James R. Angell characterized, in 1911, as a "remarkable tale of credulity founded on unconscious deceit"-a doctor, William H. Furness III, was starting, in Philadelphia, to teach an orangutan to speak. His prodigious efforts, later extended to chimpanzees, were impelled by his belief that anthropoid apes "were capable of being developed to a grade of human understanding perhaps only a step below the level of the most primitive type of human being." By 1916, he was forced to publicly admit that he could produce "only the faintest rays of evidence" for simian language capacity. Alas, nothing has changed in the intervening 65 years to tum the flickers Furness fancied seeing into a blinding blaze. APPENDIX F

The Mind of an Ape

Man's antediluvian obsession with questing for languaged brutes-or, failing to find such in nature, implanting the linguistic capacity in this or that hapless captive speechless creature-reached a seemingly maniacal meridian in the 1960s. Whereas, previously, the subjects of choice were, in the main, household birds or mammalian pets (especially dogs) or domesticated animals (such as horses or pigs), the target abruptly shifted, soon after World War II, to hard-to-get-at, exotic, and correspondingly expensive, beings. The progression from John C. Lilly's The Mind of the Dolphin, a cumulative cetaceous whimsy that captured much media attention in 1967, to the Premacks' echoic ally-titled The Mind of an Ape, emblematizes the deflection of ascendant popular focus of attention, during the 1960s into the 1980s, from the homey to the caliginous immensity of the oceans and the thick of the jungles. Of course, the specimens, having typically been plucked from their natural habitat, were transported for study to man-made environments, which exposed and predisposed their observers to the pitfalls that unavoidably bedevil all attempts at apprentissage, "if only for the reason," as Hediger affirmed in 1974, "that every experimental method is necessarily a human method and must thus per se constitute a human influence on the animal." Succinctly put, while all healthy animals are capable of communicating, by a surpris• ingly wide array and combination of nonverbal means, with their congeners and many, where need be, with members of still other species-including the human-which chance to share their ecological niche, none but man can do so by verbal means. The modest motor movements, touted as a "Sign Language," which a handful of apes are alleged to have learned by dint of years of arduous training, have all been infixed, mutatis mutandis, in pigeons and woodpeckers with corresponding success. For instance, say the Premacks, ", other apes, pigeons, and other non-primates can all perform well on generalized match-to-sample testing" (p. 39); and we now also know that some of the critical prob• lems Wolfgang Kohler had given his apes to solve before 1925 have recently been

A review of The Mind of an Ape (1983) by David Premack and Ann James Premack. This review, based in its present fonn on the original manuscript, appeared, under the title "Chattering Chimps," in the Times Literary Supplement, on June 29, 1984.

209 210 APPENDIX F replicated by Robert Epstein in pigeons with the same seeming exhibition of "insight." The abject failure of one trainer, who now controls the celebrated l8-year-old and four younger chimpanzees, to teach his wards the semblance of language has, however, taken a spectacularly compensatory turn: he at last made the big time, but per contra-by coaching human acrobats, gymnasts, and dancers to play ape, that is, to communicate nonverbally about brutish aggression, submission, courtship and motherhood, fear and joy, and to display other actions and feelings required of them by a pair of misemployed scriptwriters of arguably the most mindless film of the year, "Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes." As Mr. Binyon vividly remarked, in the TLS May 4th iswe, "Tarzan's friends and relations ... naturally don't use human speech, but mop and mow, gibber, hoot and mew realistically." Thus Prendick, the narrator of The Islalld of Doctor Moreau, tells of a monkey-man who was forever jabbering at him and at the "milder of the Beast People . . . the most arrant nonsense" and who seemed to have an idea "that to gabble about names that meant nothing was the proper use of speech." This poor ape's drivel "mUltiplied in volume, but grew less and less comprehensible, and more and more simian," after the death of that brilliant physiologist and vivisector of the ca,e of The Moreau Horrors. Considering the solid failures of the past, whether in fact or fiction, is it not reason• able to ask: why do some fringe psychologists-happily now diminished to a mere obstinate scattering-persist in so preposterous an enterprise, comparable to, say, educat• ing elephants to levitate? In 1979, David Premack confessed: "As early as 1970, I essentially quit concentrating on the attempt to operationally analyze some aspects of human language, develop training procedures for them and instill them in the ape, because it was clear to me that the accomplishments of which the ape was capable With regard to human-type language were very slight." With Ann James Premack, he further concedes, in 1983: "Some of our apes have not learned a single word" (p. 20). The only enigma that lingers is why, if the Premacks abruptly grasped the truth 14 years back, did they proceed with the publication of, respectively, Why Chimps Call Read and Intelligence ill Ape and Man (which dealt largely with verbal wit), as late as 1975 and 19767 And why yet another discussion of language-related issues in 1983? The Premacks' answer is the same as Lilly's was, way back in 1967: "We were interested in the human mind" (p. 3). Although "mind" remains a primitive, undefined term in both books, the conclusion the Premacks reach is that "each mind must solve essentially the same general problem; analyzing the physical and social worlds and repre• senting both worlds mentally" (p. 151). This excruciatingly trite statement is devoid of comparative value in this context, given the premise that chimpanzees, unlike humans, lack any capacity for language; nor is it "language alone that separates a human mind from that of a chimpanzee" (ibid). It is a pity that these coauthors appear unaware of the only both biologically and semiotieally satisfying treatment of mmd as a system of signs, or that primary receptor which Jakob von Uexktill, writing of Cemiit, in German, in 1928, consequentially characterized as "the only part of nature which is known to us directly. " It is difficult to point to any novelty in this book, which is actually a diluted collection of previously published reports. It tends to rely on such anecdotal gems as "Almost everyone who has worked closely with chimpanzees has been bitten" (p. 11)• an often denied truism that has, at least m the case of Washoe, led to serious repercus• sions; and that apes can "intentionally" lie-indeed, so they can, and so can many other animals, including a well-documented instance in the Arctic fox. APPENDIX G

A Review of Hinde's

I always believed that Frank Kennode's Modem Masters series was brilliant in concep• tion, uneven though it may have been in its realization. Too, poor marketing rendered some of the best of the procrustean intellectual biographies scarcely accessible to the general public in the United States. Fontana's Masterguides, inaugurated by Hinde's paperback and two others, seem to me an equally inspired idea; the selections of present and prospective authors are a tribute to Kermode's broad acquaintanceship, catholicity of vision, and sterling taste. Although there are other, relatively recent, compendia of ethology available-let me enumerate only a few of the more prominent books that are not mentioned in Hinde's prefactory note, such as S. A. Barnett's Modern Ethology (1981), D. A. Dewsbury's Comparative Animal Behavior (1978), J.-P. Ewert's Neu• roethology (1976, 1980), and K. Z. Lorenz's The Foundations of Ethology (1978, 1981); and the assiduous reader may also wish to keep the laudably edited Oxford Companion to Animal Behavior (1982), as well as Armin Heyner's useful trilingual Ethological Diction• ary (1977) handy-none are more wieldy, more interesting, or of higher quality. Hinde's strengths, as evinced by his works generally, especially so since his comprehensive but now in many respects antiquated Animal Behaviour: A Synthesis of Ethology and Com• parative Psychology (1966, 1970), have always been open-mindedness, limpidity in vision as well as expression, comprehension of theoretical issues anchored in empirical investigations, often his own, and a global overview of biology. At the heart of the latter is , the criterial feature that demarcates life from the inert matrix in which our terrestrial biosphere is embedded. Hinde does not, of course, employ a semiotic tenni• nology, much of which is alien to the tradition of academic ethology, but he is as sensitive to the semiotic stance as his chief intellectual forebears, notably , in his genninal and unrivalled 1872 classic, and W. H. Thorpe generally, were. Unfortunately, he does not mention Jakob von Uexkiill, the strikingly original pioneer-of whom Lorenz has observed, in 1958, that his research program was pretty nearly identical with that of ethology-who first articulated and worked out in painstaking detail the notion that every

A review of Ethology: Its Nature and Relation with Other Sciences (1982) by Robert A. Hinde. This review first appeared in the Royal Anthropological Institute Newsletter for February, 1983.

211 212 APPENDIX C organism has a contrapuntal relationship with its environment, or, in other words, that the subject matter of ethology, as well as of semiotics, consists of the circulation of messages. (The translations of all but one of von Uexkiill's works into English were performed by illiterates, rendering his thought impenetrable to an Anglophone readership, but this is now being rapidly remedied: for instance, the English version of his extraordinary Be• deutungslehre, or animal semantics, (Jakob von Uexkiilll940 [1928]) will be appearing, with extensive commentary, within a few weeks.) "Ritualization," dIscussed by Hinde on pages 126-127, serves as a minor but arresting terminological illustration of what I am hinting at as to the very substantial overlap between the two fields, the relationships of which, superficially, appear distant indeed. 's 1914 coinage, which has acquired a host of misleading connota• tions-especially for anthropologists, as Leach, for one, underlined in his 1965 address on the subject to the Royal Society-means nothing more than the phylogenetic coming into being of signs and systems of signs out of elements (behaviors, movements), which, at a previous stage of evolution, either signified nothing or did so in a manner that was less conspicuous or distinctive. (The question whether there can be any behavior whatever with zero signification is debatable, but the issue cannot be entered into here, beyond the curt assertion: no.) Hinde explains how ethologists determine instances of ritualization by the application, "across a number of species," of the comparative method, a procedure which boils down to a search for criteria of comportmental homologies. This same method, which derives from comparative anatomy ala Cuvier has been used with equal success in such diverse domains as cultural anthropology (age-area principle), folklore (Kaarle Krohn's Die folkloristische Arbeitsmethode), and with especially smashing suc• cess, linguistics, since at least Schlegel, who in 1808 juxtaposed die vergleichende Grammatik with die vergleichende Anatomie, and whose personal contacts with Cuvier are documented. In both the animal world and the human, ritualization deals with a special problem of diachronic semiotics, in the former case cross-specifically, in the latter, comparing categories within one and the same species. To illustrate how the mutual fertilization of the science of animal behavior with the science of signing behavior-two virtually identical domains whose respective lineages and forms of parlance remain quite different-might profit both, let me recall the inor• dinately publicized case of communication among vervet monkeys; (for a highly profi• cient technical description, see Animal Behaviour, Vol. 28, pp. 1070-94, 1980). The observers of the vocalizations of these simians described a (nonexhaustive) trio of acous• tically coded signs they emit in the presence of three kinds of predators: snakes, eagles, and leopards. However, from an elegant presentation of the facts the authors leap to the implied grotesque interpretation that the vervets attach separare labels to reptile, bird, and . Such a conclusion would, of course, imply that the vervets have correctly anticipated Linnaean . Actually, the system involves nothing more than dynam• ic two-dimensional spatial deixis that one would expect in arboreal creatures. Although members of the genus Cercopithecus move mainly through the forest canopy, seldom descending to the ground, C. aethiops (popularly known as "savanna monkey") was assigned, by C. J. Jolly, an intermediate "arboreality rating;" this means that verticality in a canonical space is absolutely vital for its survival. In brief, the vervets have only a single imperative alarm call, roughly rendered "Move!," transmitted in three contextual varieties: up ("leopard"), down ("eagle"), and neither (i.e., sideways, or "snake ap- HINDE'S ETHOLOGY 213 proaching"). It would be very instructive to compare the information content of this +, -, and !1) vervet subsystem with, say, the calculations by E. O. Wilson (1962) of the amounts of information transmitted in the honeybee waggle dance and the fire- odor trail. I am convinced that the number of bits transmitted will be about the same-very small indeed-in both species of and the monkey. Hinde's book is a marvel of intelligently terse organization. The first third deals with what he dubs "core ethology," devoted to problems of causation, development, function, and evolution, using precisely the study of as a field of interaction among all four approaches. I find his analysis perfectly compatible with the basic divi• sions of semiotics, two of them synchronic (structural and functional), two of them diachronic (ontogenetic and phylogenetic), and share his view that a "full understanding requires consideration of all four," while "the questions themselves are often interfer• tile" (p. 131). The middle third is a highly personal chronicle of the sometimes stormy relations between , sociobiology, various branches of psychology, physiology, endocrinology, with classical ethology. "Integration between these approaches is clearly essential" (p. 198), says Hinde, and who can gainsay his spirit of ecumenicalism? The concluding section is entitled "Ethology and the Human Social Sciences," encompassing particularly social and developmental psychology, anthropology, and psy• chiatry. The common ground among them isn't just "not extensive" (p. 269), but is downright chaotic. "," to be sure, has its practitioners-there exists, for instance, a Max Planck Institute devoted to such affairs in Bavaria-but progress has been modest and overall consolidation, let alone a unifying theory, is nowhere on the horizon. Even bits and pieces, such as the patterns of nonverbal communication in man (pp. 212- 20), are far from having been formalized in methodology; one of the leading contributors to this area, Adam Kendon, even remarked in a recently published interview that' 'there is no such field," but only the study of expression and representation, both of which he assigns to "the study of signs. " Readers of the Royal Anthropological Institute Newslet• ter (RAIN) will find in the chapter on "Anthropology" (pp. 237-65) little that is new or, alas, more abiding than iffy. References

Ackoff, Russell L., and Fred E. Emery (1972). On Purposeful Systems. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Adams, Michael Vannoy (1983). Review of Sebeok. The Play of Musement. Journal of Communica• tion 33( I): 179-181. Adams, Richard Newbold (1975). Energ.\' and Structure' A Theory of Social Power. Austin: Umver• sity of Texas Press. ___ (1981) "Natural Selection. Energetics, and 'Cultural Materialism.'" Current An• thropologv 22(6): 603-624 Aldis, Owen (1974). Play Fightll1g. New York: Academic Press. Allen, Peter M. (1981). "The Evolutionary Paradigm of Dissipative Structures." In The Evolution• ary Vision: Toward a Unifying Paradi[?m of Phvsical, BIOlogical. and Sociocultural Evolution. AAAS Selected Symposium. 61. Ench Jantsch. cd . 25-72. Boulder. Col: We,tvlew Press. Allen, T. F. H .. and Thomas B. Starr (1982). Hierarch.\': Perspectives for Ecolo[?ical Complexitr. Chicago University of ChIcago Press Allison. Harrison C. (]973). Personal Identification. Boston: Holbrook Press. Alpher, Ralph A., . and George Gamow (1948). "The OrigIn of ChemICal Elements." 73(7): 803-804. Anderson. Myrdene (1985). "Cultural Concatenation of Deceit and Secrecy." In Deception In Humans and Animals. Robert W. Mitchell and Nicholas Thompson. cds. Albany: State Univer• sIty of New York Press. Anderson. Myrdenc, . . Joseph Ransdell, Thomas A. Sebeok, and Thure von Uexkiill (1984). "A Semiotic Perspective on the Sciences: Steps Toward a New Para• digm." Semiotica 52(112): 7-47. Andrews. MIchael (1977). The Life That Lives on Man. New York: Taplinger. Attenborough. DaVId (1979) Life on Earth: A Natural History. Boston: Little. Brown Augustine. Saint (1930). De Doctrina Christiana. Therese SullIvan, trans. WashIngton. D.C.: Catholic UniversIty Press. Baer, Eugen (1981). "Ole Zeichenlehre von Thomas A. Sebeok." In Die Welt als Zeichen. Klassiker der modernen Semiotik. Maitin Krampen et al., eds., 281-321. Berlin: Severin und Siedler ___ (1982) .. 'The Medical Symptom: Phylogeny and Ontogeny." American Journal of SemIOt• ics 1(3) \7-34. ___ (1986). "Symptom (and Syndrome)." In Encyclopedic D,ctlOnarv of Semiotics. Thomas A. Sebeok. ed. BerlIn: Mouton de Gruyter.

215 216 REFERENCES

Bailly, Auguste (1974). Maeterlinck. New York: Haskell House. Baldwin, Ian T., and Jack C. Schultz (1983). "Rapid Changes m Tree Leaf Chemistry Induced by Damage: Evidence for Communication Between Plants." Science 22(4607): 277-279. Barber, Janet M., and Peter A. DIllman (1981). Emergency Patient Care for the EMT-A. Reston, Va.: Reston. Bargatzky, Walter (1978). Das Umversum Lebt: Die Aufsehenerregende Hypothese vom Organl• schen Aufbau des Weltalls. Munich: Wilhelm Heyne Verlag. Barnett, S. A. (1981). Modern Ethology. New York: Oxford University Press. Barthes, Roland (1972). "Semiologie et medecine." In Les sciences de lafobe, Roger Bastide, ed., 37-46. : Mouton ___ (1974). SIZ New York: Hill & Wang. Bartlett, Sir Frederick C. (1932). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bates, Henry W. (1862). "Contributions to an Fauna of the Amazon Valley. LepIdoptera Heliconidae." Transactions of the Linnean Society 23: 495-566. Bateson, Gregory (1955). "A Theory of Play and Fantasy." Psychiatric Research Reports 2: 39-51. ___ (1968). "Redundancy and Coding." In Animal Communication: Techniques of Study and Results of Research. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., 614-626. Bloommgton: Indiana University Press. ___ (1972). Steps to an Ecology ofMind: A Revolutionary Approach to Man's Understanding of Himself. New York: Ballantine. ___ (1979). Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. New York: E. P. Dutton. Bateson, Mary Catherine (1972). Our Own Metaphor: A Personal Account of a Coriference on the Effects of ConscIOus Purpose on Human Adaptation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Batty, Michael and Bruce Hutchinson, eds., (1983). Systems Analysis In Urban Policymaking and Planning (NATO Conference Series, II, Systems Science, 12). New York: Plenum Press. Beer, Colin G. (1970). "Individual Recognition of Voice in the Social Behavior of Birds." In Advances in the Study of Behavior. Daniel S. Lehrman et al., eds., 3: 27-74. New York: Academic Press. Behan, Richard J. (1926). Pain: Its Origin, Conduction, PerceptIOn, and Diagnostic SIgnificance. New York: D. Appleton. Benoist, Jean-Marie, et al. (1977). L'ldentite. Seminaire Interdisciplinaire dirige par Claude Levi• Strauss, 1974-75. Paris: Bernard Grasset. Bense, Max (1984). "The So-Called 'Anthropic Principle' as a SemIotic Principle in Empirical Theory Formation." American Journal of Semiotics 2(4): 93-97. Benveniste, Emile (1971 [1966]). Problems in General Linguistics. Coral Gables, Fla.: Umversity of Miami Press. Berlinski, David (1976). On Systems AnalYSIS: An Essay Concerning the Limitations of Some Mathe• matical Methods in the Social. Political, and Biological Sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press. Bertalanffy, Ludwig von (1973). General Systems Theory: Foundations, Development, ApplicatIOns. Revised edition. New York: George Braziller. ___ (1981). A Systems View of Man. Paul A. La Violette, ed. Boulder, Col.: Westview Press. Bidder, George Parker (1851) .. 'On Mental Calculation. " Institution of Civil Engineers in London, Minutes of Proceedings 15: 251-280. Bilz, Rudolf (1940). Pars Pro . Leipzig: Georg Thieme. Bochner, Barry R. and Bruce N. Ames (1982). "ZTP (5-amino 4-Imidazole carboxamide riboSIde 5'-tnphosphate): a Proposed Alarmone for IO-formyltetrahydrofolate Deficiency." Cell 29(3): 929-937. Bogart, Dodd H. (1980). "Feedback, Feedforward, and Feedwithin: Strategic Information m Sys• terns." Behavioral Science 25: 237-249. REFERENCES 217

Bonner, John Tyler (1980). The Evolution of Culture in Animals. Princeton: Press. Bookchin, Murray (1982). The Ecology of Freedom: The Emergence and Dissolution of Hierarchy. Palo Alto, California: Cheshire Books. Bouissac, Paul (1976). "The 'Golden Legend' of Semiotics." Semiotica 17(4): 371-384. ___ (1979). "A Compass for Semiotics." Ars Semeiotica 2(2): 205-221. ___ (1981). "Figurative Versus Objective Semiotics: An Epistemological Crossroads." In Semiotics 1981 (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart, eds., pp. 3-12. New York: Plenum Publication Corporation. Bouissac, Paul, Michael Herzfeld, and Roland Posner, eds., (1986). 1conicity: Essays on the Nature of Culture. Tilbingen: Stauffenburg Verlag. Boulding, Kenneth E. (1978). Ecodynamics: A New Theory of Societal Evolution. Beverly Hills, California, and London: Sage Publications. ___ (1981). "Human Knowledge as a Special System." Behavioral Science 26(2): 93-102. Bredehoeft, John D. and Tidu Maini (1981). "Strategy for Radioactive Waste Disposal In Crystalline Rocks." Science 213: 293-296. Bremerrnann, Hans J. (1983). "Parasites at the Origin of Life." Journal of Mathematical Biology 16: 165-·180. Brown, Richard E. (1979). "Mammalian Social Odors: A Critical Review." In Advances in the Study of Behavior. Jay S. Rosenblatt et al., eds., 10: 103-162. New York: Academic Press. Bruner, Jerome S., Jacqueline J. Goodnow, and George A. Austin (1956). A Study of Thinking. New York: Wiley. Buckley, Walter, ed., (1968). Modern Systems Researchfor the Behavioral Scientist: A Sourcebook. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Buczynska-Garewicz, Hanna (1981). ReView of Sebeok, The Sign & Its Masters. Studia FilozoJiczne I: 176-180. Blihler, Karl (1965 [1934]). Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer. Bunge, Mario (1980). The Mind-Body Problem: A Psychobiological Approach. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Burnet, James [Lord Monboddoj (1774). Of thE' Origin and Progress of Language. 2. Edinburgh: J. Balfour. Butler, Christopher (1970). Number Symbolism. New York: Barnes and Noble. Buyssens, Eric (1973). "Les noms singuliers.·' Cahiers 28: 25-34. Cabe, Patrick A. (1980). "Picture Perception in Non-Human SubJects." In The Perception of Pictures, Margaret A. Hagen, ed., 2: 305-343. New York: Academic Press. Cairns-Smith. A. G. (1966). "The Origin of Life and the Nature of the Pnmitive Gene." Journal of Theoretical Biology 10: 53-88. ___ (1982). Genetic Takeover and the Mineral Origins of Life. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press. Cairns-Smith, A. G. and G. L. Walker (1974) "Primitive Metabolism." BioSystems 5: 173-186. Capelle, Thorsten (1982). Rettet dem Dativ! Munster: Coppenrath Verlag. Caplan, David, ed., (1980). Biological Studies of Mental Processes. Cambridge: MIT Press. Carter, Brandon (1974). "Large Number Coincidences and the Anthropic PrinCiple in Cosmology." In Corifrontation of Cosmological Theories with Observational Data. Malcom S. Longair, ed., pp. 291-298. Dordrecht: Reidel. Cassirer, Ernst (1946). Language and Myth. New York: Harper and Brothers. Chadwick, John and William N. Mann (1950). The Medical Works of Hippocrates. Oxford: Blackwell. 218 REFERENCES

Chalmers. Nell R. (1980). "The Ontogeny of Play in Feral Olive Baboons (PaplO anubis)." Ammal BehavIOur 28: 570-585 Chamberlain. Ernest N. and Colin Ogilvie. eds .. (19749). Symptoms and Signs III Clinical MediclIle. Bristol: Wright. Chance. M. R. A. and W M. S. Ru&sell (1959). "Protean Displays; a Form of Allaesthetlc Behaviour." Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 135: 65-70. Chapin. James Paul (1924). "Profiteers of the Busy Bee." Natural History 24(3): 326-336. ChaUVin, Remy (1970). The World of : A Science-FictIOn Umverse. New York. HIli & Wang ChaUVin. Remy and Bernadette Muckensturm-Chauvin (1980). Behat'loral ComplexitIes. New York: International Universitie, Press. Cheraskin, Emanuel and Wilham Ringsdorf (1973). Predictn'e Medicine: A Study III Strategy. Mountainview. Cal.: PaCifiC Pres,. Cherry. E. Cohn (1978 3). On Human CommunicatIOn A Ret'lew. a Survey. and a CrillClsm. Cambndge: MIT Press. Chisholm, Rodenck M .. and Thomas D. Feehan (1977). "The Intent to Deceive" Journal oj Philosophy 74(3): 143-159. Chomsky. Noam (1980). Rules and Representations New York: Columbia Untverslty Press. Chomsky. Noam and DaVid Premack (1979). "Species of Intelhgence." The Sciences 19(9): 6-11. 23. Cochran, Doris M. (1954). Frogs of Southeastern Brazil. Untted States National Museum Bulletin 206. Washington, D.C.: Smithsontan Institution. Colby. Kenneth Mark and Michael T. McGUire (1981). "Signs and Symptoms." The Sciences 21 (9): 21-23. Conrad. Michael (1972) "Information Processing in Molecular Systems." Currents III Modern BlOlog)" 5: 1-14. ___ (1983). Adaptability. The Significance of Variability from Molecule to Ecosystem. New York: Plenum Press. Coquet, J C (1982). SemlOtique-L'Ecole de Paris. Paris: Hachette. Universlte Corning, Peter A. (1983) The Synergism Hypothesis: A Theory ofProgressil'e EvolutIOn. New York: McGraw-Hili. Count, Earl W. (1973). Being and Becoming Human. Essays on the Biogram. New York: Van Nostrand. Crall. Ted (1981). Apetalk & Whalespeak. Los Angeles: J. P. Tarcher. Cnchton, Michael (1980). Congo. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Crook. John Hurrell (1970). "SOCial Organtzatton and the Environment: Aspects of Contemporary Social Ethology." Animal Behaviour 18: 197-209 Curtis, James M. (1978). Culture as Polyphony: An Essay on the Nature of Paradigms. Columbia University of Missouri Press. Daiches, David (1971). A Third World. Sussex University Press. Darnay, Arsen (1981 [1976]). "AspIC'S Mystery." In Space Mail. Isaac ASlmov. Martin Harry Greenberg, and Charles Waugh. eds , 2: pp. 42-65. New York: Fawcett Crest. Darwin, Charles (1872). The Expression of the Emotions III Man and Animals. London: John Murray. Davies. Paul (1980). Other Worlds. New York: Simon & Schuster. ___ (1981). The Edge of Infinity: Where the Ull/verse Comes From and How It Will End New York: Simon & Schuster. Dawkins, Richard (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ___ (1982). The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as the Unit of Selection. Oxford: W H. Freeman. Dawkins. Richard and John R. Krebs (1978). "Animal Signals: Information or Manipulation?" In REFERENCES 219

Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach. John R. Krebs and Nicholas B. Davies, eds., pp. 282-315. Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer Associates. Deely, John N. (1966). "Evolution: Concept and Content." Listening l(1): 38-66. ___ (1969). "The Philosophical Dimensions of the Ongin of Species." The Thomist 38(1): 75- 149; 38(2): 251-342. ___ (1975). "Modem Logic, Animal Psychology, and Human Discourse." Revue de I'Univer- sire d'Ottawa 45(1): 80-J(lO. ___ (1976). "The Doctrine of Signs: Taking Form at Last." SemlOtlca 18(2): 171-193. ___ (l978a). "What's in a Name?" Semiotica 22(1-2): 151-181. ___ (l978b). :'Toward the Origin of Semiotic." In Sight, Sound, and Sense. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., pp. 1-30. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ___ (1980). "The Nonverbal Inlay in Linguistic Communication." In The Signifying Animal, Irmengard Rauch and Gerald F. Carr, eds. pp. 201-217. B1oommgton: Indiana University Press. ___ (1981). "Cognition from a Semiotic Point of View. " In Semiotics 1981 (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart, eds., pp. 21-28. New York: Plenum Press. ___ (l982a). Introducing Semiotic: Its History and Doctrine. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ___ (I 982b). "On the Notion of ." In Semiotics 1982 (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart, eds. New York: Plenum Publication Corporation. ___ (l982c). "Neglected Figures in the History of Semiotic Inquiry: John Poinsot." In History of Semiotics. Achim Eschbach and Jurgen Trabant, eds. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ---(I 985a). Editorial Afterword, Semiotic Markers, Notes, Indices, and Establishment of the Text for the Bilingual Edition of Poinsot (1632), q. v. ___ Trans. (l985b). Tractatus de Signis: The Semiotic of John Poinsot (1632), translated III consultation with Ralph Austin Powell. Berkeley: University of California Press. Deely, John N. and Margot D. Lenhart (1981). "Fourth Annual Symposium on Empincal Semiot• ics." In Semiotics 1981 (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart, eds., pp. 317-343. New York: Plenum Press. De Lacy, Phillip Howard and Estelle Allen De Lacy, eds. (1941). Philodemus: On Methods of Inference; A Study in Ancient Empiricism. Philadelphia: American Philological Association. Delbriick, Max (1978). "Mind from Matter?" American Scholar 47: 339-353. Deledalle, Gerard (1979). Theorie et pratique du slgne. Paris: Payot. Derrida, Jacques (1975). "Le facteur de la verite." Poetique 21: 96-147. Desmond, Adrian (1979). The Ape's Rejlexion. New York: Dial Press/J. Wade. Dewsbury, D. A. (1978). Comparative Animal Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. Dicke, Robert H. (1961). "Dirac's Cosmology and Mach's Principle." Nature 192: 440-441. Dickerson, Richard E. (1978). "Chemical Evolution and the Origin of Life." Scientific American 239(3): 70-86. Diener, T. O. (1983). "The Vlfoid-a Subviral Pathogen." American Scientist 71(5): 481-489. Dixson, A. F. (l98\). Natural History of the Gorilla. New York: Columbia University Press. Dobert, R. (1981). "The Role of Stage Models Within a Theory of Social Evolution, Illustrated by the European Witch Craze" In The Philosophy of Evolution. Uffe J. Jensen and Rom Harre, eds., pp. 71-119. New York: St. Martin's Press. Eccles, John, cd. (1982). Mind and Bram: The Many-Faceted Problems. Washington: Paragon House. Eco, Umberto (1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington. Indiana University Press. ___ (1977). "The Influence of on the Development of SemIOtics." In Roman 220 REFERENCES

lakobson: Echoes of His Scholarship. Daniel Armstrong and C. H. van Schooneveld, eds., pp. 39-58. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press. ___ (1979) The Role of the Reader. Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ___ (1980). "The Sign Revisited." Philosophy and Social CritiCIsm 7(3/4): 263-290 Eco, Umberto and Thomas A. Sebeok, eds. (1983). The Sign of Three: Dupin. Holmes, Peirce. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Ehrhch, Paul and Peter H. Raven (1964). "Butterflies and Plants: A Study in Coevolution." EvolutIOn 18: 586-608. Eigen, Manfred and Ruthild Winkler (1981). Laws of the Game: How the Principles of Nature Govern Chance. Robert and Rita Kimber, trans. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Eigen, Manfred, Wilham Gardmer, Peter Schuster, and Ruthild Winkler-OswatItsch (1981). "The Ongin of Genetic InformatIon." Scientific American 244(4): 88-118. Eisenberg, J. F. and Wilton S. Dillon, eds. (1971). Man and Beast: Comparative Social Behavior. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. Eisenberg, John (1981). "Parental Care." In The Oxford Companion to Animal Behavior. David McFarland, ed., pp. 443-447. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Eldredge, Niles and Joel Cracraft (1980). Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process New York: Columbia University Press. Eldredge, Niles and Ian Tattersall (1982). The Myths of Human Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press. Elstein, Arthur S., et al. (1978). Medical Problem Solving: An Analysis of Clinical Reasoning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Elton, C. S. (1927). Animal Ecology. London: Sidgwlck and Jackson. Epstem, Robert, Robert P. Lanza, and B. F. Skinner (1980). "Symbolic Communication Between Two Pigeons (Columbia livia domestica)." Science 207: 543-545. Eschbach, Achim, ed. (1981). Zeichen iiber Zeichen iiber Zelchen. Tiibingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Esposito, Joseph L. (1980). Evolutionary Metaphysics. Athens, 0.: Umversity Press. Ewert, J.-P. (1980). . Berlin and New York: Springer-Verlag. Fabrega, Horacio, Jr. (1980 [1974]). Disease and Social Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press. Fairbanks, Matthew J. (1976). "Peirce on Man as a Language: A Textual Interpretation." Transac• tions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 12(1): 18-32. Falk, Dean (1984). "The Petrified Brain." Natural History 93(9): 36-39. Fein, Greta (1975). "A Transformational Analysis of Pretending." Developmental Psychology 11: 291-296. Feinberg, Gerald and Robert Shapiro (1980). Life Beyond Earth: The Intelligent Earthling's Guide to Life in the Universe. New York' William Morrow. Fernald, Dodge (1984). The Hans Legacy. A Story of Science. Hillsdale, N.1.. Lawrence Erlbaum. Ferris, Stephen, et al. (1983). "Alien Mitochondrial DNA m Mice, Reported in Note, 'Jumping Genes' ." SCience 220 (4599): 811. Firth, Raymond (1957). Man and Culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Fisch, Max H. (1982) "The Range of Peirce's Relevance." The Monist 65(2): 124-141. Florence, P. Sargant and J. R. L. Anderson (1977). C. K. Ogden- A Collective Memoir. London: Elek Pemberton. Florkin, Marcel (1974). "Concepts of Molecular BlOsemiotics and of Molecular Evolution." In Comparative Biochemistry. Molecular Evolution. Comprehensive Biochemistry 29A. Marcel Florkm and Elmer H. Stotz, eds., pp. 1-124. Amsterdam: ElseVier. Flournoy, Theodore (1911). Spiritism and Psychology. New York: Harper & Brothers Freud, Sigmund (1961 [1923]). The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of REFERENCES 221

Sigmund Freud. Vol. 19, The Ego and the Id. London: Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psycho-Analysis. Freudenthal, Hans (1960). Lincos: Design of a Languagefor Cosmic Intercourse. Amsterdam: North Holland. ___ (1974). "CosmIc Language." In Current Trends in Linguistics. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., 12: 1019-·1042. The Hague: Mouton. Friedmann, Herbert (1955). The Honey-Guides. United States National Museum Bulletin 208. Wash• ington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Fuller, R. Buckminster. et al. (1970). I Seem To be a Verb. New York: Bantam Books. Furness, William H. (1916). "Observations on the Mentality of Chimpanzees and Orangutans." Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 55: 281-290. Futuyma, Douglas J. and Montgomery Slatkin, eds. (1983). Coevolution. Sunderland, Mass.: Sin• auer Associates. Galen (see Kiihn). Gamow, George (1947). One Two Three . .. Infinity: Facts and Speculations o/Science. New York: New American Library. Gardin, Jean-Claude, Paul Bouissac, and Kenneth E. Foote (1984). "A Program for Semiotics." Semiotica 52: 1-5. Gardner, Howard (1982). "Interdisciplinary Essayist." Semiotica 38: 347-356. Gardner, Martin (1981). Science: Good, Bad and Bogus. Buffalo: Prometheus Books. ___ (1982a). "How Well Can Animals Converse?" Semiotica 38(3-4): 347-367. ___ (l982b). "Quantum Weirdness." Discover 3(10): 69-76. ___ (1983). Order and Surprise. Buffalo: Prometheus Books. Gatlin, Lila L. (1972).lriformation Theory and the Living System. New York: Columbia University Press. Gelb, Ignace J. (1973). "Written Records and Decipherment." In Current Trends in LinJ::uistics. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., 11: 253-284. The Hague: Mouton. ___ (1980). "Principles of Writing Systems Within the Frame of Visual Communication." In Processing of Visible Language. Paul A. Kolers, Merald E. Wrolstad, and Herman Bouma, eds., 2: 7·-24. New York: Plenum Press. Gell-Mann, Murray, and Yuval Ne'eman (1964). The Eightfold Way. Menlo Park, Cal.: W. A. Benjamin, Inc. Gerard, Ralph W. (1957). "Units and Concepts of Biology." Science 125 (3245): 429-433. ___ (1960). "Becoming: The Residue of Change. "In The Evolution ofMan: Man, Culture, and Society, Volume 2 of Evolution After Darwin, the University of Chicago Centennial. Sol Tax ed., 255-267. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ginzburg, Carlo (1983). "Clues: Morelli, Freud, and Sherlock Holmes." In The Sign of Three: Dupin, Holmes, Peirce. and Thomas A. Sebeok, eds., pp. 81-118. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Goffman, Erving (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: PrentIce-Hall. Goldstein, Jeffrey H., ed. (1979). Sports, Games and Play: Social and Psychological Viewpoints. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Golopentia-Eretescu, Sanda (1977). Review of Sebeok, Contributions to the Doctrine of Signs. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 22: 117-130. Gopnik. Myrna (1983). "The Debate Over the Ethology of Language: A Review of Sebeok and Umiker-Sebeok, Speaking of Apes." Journal of Social and Biological Structures 6: 273-283. Gould, Stephen Jay (1977). Ontogen) and Phylogeny. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press. ___ (1980). "The Evolutionary Biology of Constraint." Daedalus 109(2): 39-52. 222 REFERENCES

Gould, Stephen Jay and Elisabeth S. Vrba (1982). "Exaptahon-A Missmg Term m the SCience of Form." Paleobiology 8(1): 4-15. Gregory, Richard L. (1981). Mind in Science: A History of Explanations in Psychology and Physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Greimas, Algirdas Julien and Joseph Courtes. (1979). SemlOtlque: dictionnUlre raisonne de la theorie du langage. Paris: Classiques Hachette. Griffin, Donald R. (1981 [1976]). The QuestIOn of Animal Awareness: EvolutIOnary Continuity of Mental Experience. Los Altos, California: William Kaufmann. Grinnell, Joseph (1924). "Geography and EvolutIOn." Ecology 5: 225-229. Guiraud, Pierre (1971). La semlOlogie. Paris: Presses Universuaires de France. Gwmner, Eberhard (1966). "Uber eimge Bewegungs~plele des Kolkraben (Corvus cora.t L.)." Zellschrift filr Tierpsychologle 23: 28-36. Hagen, Margaret A. (1980). The Perception of PIctures New York. AcademiC Press. Hailman, Jack (1982). "Comparative Studies." In The Oxford Companion to Ammal BehavIOr. David McFarland, ed., pp. 92-97. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Haken, Hermann, ed. (1977). Synergetic: A Workshop (Proceedings of the Internahonal Workshop on Synergetics at Schloss Elmau, Bavaria, 2-7 May 1977). Berlin, Heidelberg and New York. Springer-Verlag. Hall, Edward T. (1984). The Dance of Life: The Other Dimension of Time. Garden City, New York: Anchor Press, Doubleday. Halls, Wilfred D. (1960). Maunce Maeterlinck: A Study of His Life and Thought. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Hansmann, A. (1857). "Die Sylvlen der Insel Sardinien " Naumannia 7: 404-429. Haraway, Donna Jeanne (1976). Crystals, Fabrics, and Fields: Metaphors of OrganiCism In Twen• tieth-century Developmental Biology. New Haven: Yale University Press. HardWick, Charles S., ed. (1977). Semiotic and Significs: The Correspondence Between Charles S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Harlow, Harry F. and Clara Mears (1979). The Human Model: Primate Perspectlves. New York: Halsted Press. Harris, James (1771 [1751]). Hermes or a Philosophical Inquiry Concerning Universal Grammar. London: John Nourse. Harrison, Jane E. (1900). "Pandora's Box." The Journal of Hellemc Studies 20: 99-114. Harrison, J. M. (1984). "Disposal of Radioactive Wastes." Science 226(4670): 11-14. Hartman, Hyman (1975). "Speculauons on the Evolution of the Genetic ." Origins of Life 6 (3): 423-427. ___ (1982). "Life, Language, and Society." Semiotica 42(2): 89-106. Hawkes, Terence (1977). and SemlOtic5. Berkeley: University of California Press. Hayes, Catherine H. (1951). The Ape in Our House. New York: Harper. Hediger, Heini (1973). "Em Verriiterischer Vogel." Tages Anzelger Magazln 23: 24-31. ___ (1974). "Communication between Man and Animal." Image 62: 27-40. ___ (1976). "Proper Names m the Animal Kingdom." Expenentia 32: 1357-1364. ___ (1980). Tiere verstehen. Erkenntnisse eines Tlerpsychologen. Munich: Kindler Verlag. Heidel, William Arthur (1941). Hippocratic MediCine: It5 Spirit and Method. New York: Columbia University Press. Heinze, Max (1872). Die Lehrer vom Logos in der Griechischer Philosophie Oldenberg: F. Schmidt. Heisenberg, Werner (1955). The 's Conception of Nature. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Heusser, Hans Rudolf (1974). "Higher Anurans." In Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia. REFERENCES 223

Bernhard Grzimek and Werner Ladiges, eds., 5(2): 397-454. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Heyner, Armin (1977). Ethological Dictionary. Berlin and Hamburg: Paul Parey. Hinde, Robert A. (1966). Animal Behaviour: A Synthesis of Ethology and . New York: McGraw-HilI. ___ (1982). Ethology: Its Nature and RelatIOns with Other Sciences. New York: Oxford Univer• sity Press. Hippocrates (1788). Prognostic. London: PrInted by T. Bensley for C. Elliot, T. Kay, & Company. Hirose, Shizumu (1979). "The Succession of Monkey Training Within the Group Concerned with Monkey Performances in Japan." Minzokugaku-Kenkyu (The Japanese Journal of Ethnology) 44(2): 133-159. Hirsch, Morris W. (1984). "The Dynamical Systems Approach to Differential Equations." Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society (new series) II (I): 1-64. Hjelmslev, (1953). Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. International Journal of American Linguistics, Memoir 7. Baltimore: Waverly Press. Hockett, Charles E. (1960). "The Origin of Speech." Scientific American 203: 88-96. Holenstein, Elmar (1983). "Natural and ArtifiCial Intelligence: Computer Science and Phe• nomenology." Philosophy of Science (Tokyo) 16: 63-84. Holling, C. S. (1976). "Resilience and Stability of Ecosystems." In Evolution and Consciousness: Human Systems m Transition. Erich Jantsch and Conrad H. Waddington, eds., pp. 73-92. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Howard, H. Eliot (1920). Territory in Bird Life. London: Cambridge University Press. Huff, Theodore (1951). Charlie Chaplin. New York: Henry Schuman. Hull, David (1981). "Units of Evolution: A Metaphysical Essay." In The Philosophy of Evolution. Uffe J. Jensen and Rom Harre, eds., pp. 23-44. New York: SI. Martin's Press. Humphreys, Willard C. (1968). Anomalies and Scientific Theorzes. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper. Hunt, Morton (1982). The Universe Within: A New Science Explores the Human Mind. New York: Simon & Schuster. Huntingford, Felicity (1982). 'The Evolution of Cooperation and ." In Cooperation and Competition m Humans and Animals, Andrew M. Colman, ed., pp. 3-25. Berkshire, England: Van Nm,trand Reinhold. Hutchinson, G. Evelyn (1957). "Concluding Remarks, Cold Spring Harbor SymposIUm." Quan• titative Biology 22: 415-427. ___ (1978). An Introduction to Population Ecology. New Haven: Yale UniverSity Press. ___ (1979). The Kindly Fruits of the Earth' RecollectIOns of an Embryo Ecologist. New Haven: Yale University Press. Hyman, Ray (1981). "The Psychic Reading." In Annals of the Nell' York Academy olSciences. Vol. 364, The Clever Hans Phenomenon: Communication with Horses. Whales, Apes, and People. Thomas A Sebeok and Robert Rosenthal. eds., pp. 169-181 New York: New York Academy of Sciences Ingram, David (1978). "Typology and Universals of Personal Pronouns." In Unllwsals ol Human Language, Joseph H. Greenberg, ed., 3: 213-247. Stanford, Cal.: Stanford UniverSity Press. Jacob, Fran~ois (1965). Le,on inaugurale. Paris: College de France. ___ (1982). The Possible and the Actual. Seattle: Umverslty of Washmgton Press. Jacob, Fran~ois and Jacques Monod (1961). "Genellc Regulatory Mechamsms In the Synthesis of Proteins" Journal of Molecular Biology 3: 318-356. Jakobson, Roman (1965). "Quest for the Essence of Language." Diogenes 51: 21-37. ___ (1970a). Main Trends in the Science of Language. New York: Harper & Row. 224 REFERENCES

___ (I 970b). "Linguistics." In Main Trends of Research In the Social and Human Sciences. Part I. Social Sciences (Studies in the Behavioral Sciences. 8), pp. 419-463 Paris and Berlin: Mouton, for UNESCO. ___ (1971). Selected Writings 2: Word and Language. The Hague: Mouton. ___ (1980). The Framework of Language. Ann Arbor: Studies In the HumamtJes. ___ (1981). Selected Writings 3: Poetry of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry. The Hague: Mouton. Jakobson. Roman and Linda R. Waugh (1979). The Sound Shape of Language. Bloomington: Indiana UniveTSIty Press. James, William (1907). Pragmatism. New York: Longmans. Green. Jantsch. Erich (1980). The Self-Organizing Universe. Scientific and Human Implications oj the Emerging Paradigm of Evolution. Oxford: Pergamon Press. ___ Ed. (1981). The EvolutIOnary Vision: Toward a UnifYing Paradigm of Physical. BIOlogical. and Sociocultural Evolution. AAAS Selected Symposium. 61. Boulder. Col.: Westview Press. Jantsch. Ench and Conrad H. Waddington. eds. (1976). Evolution and Consciousness: Human Systems in Transition. Reading. Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Jastrow. Joseph (1935). Wish and Wisdom: Episodes in the Vagaries of Belief New York: Appleton• Century. Jastrow, Robert (1981). The Enchanted Loom. Mind in the Universe. New York: Simon & Schuster. Jerison, Harry J. (1975). "Fossil EVidence of the Evolution of the Human Brain. " In Annual ReView of Anthropology 4: 27-58 Palo Alto. Cal.: Annual Reviews. Jewell, Peter Arundel and Caroline LOlZOS. eds. (1966). Play. Exploration and Territory In Mam• mals. London: AcademiC Press. Johansson. Thomas B. and Peter Steen (1981). Radioactive Waste from Nuclear Plants. Berkeley: University of California Press. Johnson, Barbara (1980). The Critical Difference: Essays In the Contemporary Rhetoric of Reading. Baltimore: The 10hns Hopkins UmveTSIty Press. Johnson. Harry Miles (1912). "The Talking Dog." Science 35: 749-751. 10hnson. Victor R. (1977). "Individual RecogmtJon In the Banded Shnmp (Olivier)." Animal Behavior 25: 418-428. 10hnston, Timothy D. (1976). "Theoretical Considerations In the Adaptation of Ammal Commu- nication Systems." Journal of Theorellcal BIOlogy 57:43-72. lones, Roger S. (1982). PhYSICS as Metaphor. New York. New Amencan Library. ludson, Horace Freeland (1979). The Eighth Day of CreatIOn. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kael, Pauline (1982). "The Pure and the Impure" The New Yorker. lune 14. 119. Kahn, DaVid (1967). The Codebreakers: The Story of Secret Wntlng. New York: Macmillan. Karban. Richard and James R. Carey (1984). "Induced ReSistance of Cotton Seedlings to Mites." Science 225 (4657): 53-54. Katz. DaVid (1937) Animals and Men: Studies In Comparaflve Psychology London: Longmans. Green. Kawai. Masao (1978-1979) At Pnmate Research instllute Meeting. Kyoto Unil'erslfy Bulletin 13. 545-554. Kelber, Wilhelm (1958). Die Logoslehre: von Heraklit b,s Origenes. Stuttgart: Verlag Urachhaus. Kellog. W N. and L. A Kellog (1933). The Ape and the Child. New York: McGraw-Hill. Keller. Robert (1975). "Das Spielverhalten der Keas (Nestor notabills Gould) de, Zurcher Zoos" Zelfschrift fiir Tierpsychologie 38: 393-408. Kennedy. 10hn M. (1974). A Psychology of Picture Perception. San FranCISco: Jossey-Bass. Kenny. A. 1. P .. H. C. Longuet-Hlgglns, 1. R. Lucas. and Conrad H. Waddington (1972) The Nature oj Mind. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University Press. Kerferd. G B (1967). "Logo,." The Encyclopedia of Philosophy Paul Edward, et al . ed .. 5: 83- 84. REFERENCES 225

Kessel, Edward L. (1955). "The Mating Activities of Balloon Flies." Systematic 4(3): 97- 104. Kevelson, Roberta (1981). "Francis Lieber and the Semiotics of Law and Politics." In Semiotics 1981 (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart, eds., pp. 167-177. New York: Plenum Press. Klaus, Georg (1962). Semiotik und Erkenntnistheorie. Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Kleinpaul, Rudolf (1899). Wie heisst der HUlld? Internationales Hundenamenbuch. Leipzig: H. Schmidt and C. Giinther. ___ (1972 [1888]). Sprache ohne Worte: Idee einer allgemeinen Wissenschaft der Sprache. The Hague: Mouton. Klingsberg, Cyrus and James Duguid (1982). "Isolating Radioactive Wastes." American Scientist 70(2): 182-190. Kloft, Werner (1959). "Versuch einer Analyse der Trophobiotischen Beziehungen von Ameisen zu Aphiden " Biologisches Zentralblatt 78: 863-870. Klopf, A. Harry (1982). The Hedonistic Neuroll, A Theory of Memory, , and Intelligence. New York and London: Hemisphere Press. Knapp. Bettina (1975). Maurice Maeterlinck. Boston: Twayne. Koestler, Arthur (1967). The Ghost in the Machine. New York: Macmillan. ___ (1978). Janus: A Summmg Up. London: Hutchinson of London; New York: Vintage Books. Kots, Nadezhda Nikolaevna [Ladygina] (1935). Infant Ape and Human Child. Scientific Memoirs of the Museum Darwinianum in Moscow. Moscow. Kotzwinkle, William (1982). E.T.: The Extraterrestrial. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. Krall, Karl (19122). Denkende Tiere: Beitriige zur Tierseelenkunde auf Grund elgener Versuche. Leipzig: Friedrich Engelmann. Krampen, Martin (1979). "Perfusion of Signs without Confusion." Ars Semeiotica 2(3): 327-359. ___ (I98Ia). "The Developmental Semiotics of Jean Piaget (1896-1980)." SemlOtica 34: 193- 218. ___ (l98Ib). "Phytosemiotics." Semiotica 36(3-4): 187-209. Krampen, Martin, Klaus Oehler, Roland Posner, Thomas A. Sebeok. and Thure von Uexkiill (in press). Classics of Semiotics. New York: Plenum Press. Krebs, John R. and Nicholas B. Davies, eds. (1984 [1978]). Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach. Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer Associates. Kristeva, Julia (1969). Semiotike: Recherches pour une semanalyse. Paris: Seuil. Krohn, Kaarle (1926). Die Folkloristische Arbeitsmethode. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Kiihn, Carolus Gottlob, ed. (1821-1833). Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia. 22 vols. Leipzig: Cnobloch. [Semiotics is discussed, in this standard edition, in XIV: 689-690, 693, and XVIII (B): 633. Though not complete, this edition is bilingual (Greek and Latin). For bibliographical details concerning Galen's writings, see Sarton 1954, Chapter 4.] Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970 [1962]). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Labov, William and David Fanshel (1977). Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press. Lacan, Jacques (1966). Ecrits. Paris: Seuil. Laidler, Keith (1980). The Talking Ape. New York: Stein & Day. Lamb. Sidney M. (1981). "On the Gains of Linguisllcs." , The Seventh LACUS Forum 1980: 17-27. Columbia, S.C.: Hornbeam Press. Lancy, David F. (1980). "Play in Species Adaptation." In Annual Review of Anthropology 9: 471- 495. Palo Alto, Cal.: Annual Reviews. Larsen, Svend Erik (1980). "La structure productrice du mot d'esprit et de la semiosis. Essai sur Freud et Peirce." Degres 8(21): 1-18. Laszlo, Erwin, ed. (1972). The Relevance of General Systems Theory. New York: George Braziller. 226 REFERENCES

___ (1983). Systems Science and World Order: Selected Studies. Oxford' Pergamon Press. Latham, Robert G. (1848). The Works of Thomas Sydenham. M.D. London: Sydenham Society. Laudan, L. (1981). "A Refutation of Convergent Realism." In The Philosophy of Evolutlon. Uffe J. Jensen and Rom Harre, eds., pp. 232-268. New York: St. Martm's Press. Lavers, Annette (1982). : Structuraltsm and After. London: Methuen. Lawrence, Christopher (1982). "Illnesses and Their Meanings." Times Literary Supplement No.4, (October 1), 148. Leach, E. R. (1966). "Ritualization in Man in Relation to Conceptual and Social Development." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society ofLondon (251): Biological Sciences 772: 403- 408. ___ (1984). "Semiotics, Ethology, and the Limits of Human Understanding." Patten Founda• tion Lecture I, Indiana University, Bloomington, October 9, 1984. Lee, Dorothy (1959). "Codifications of Reality: Lineal and Nonlineal." In her Freedom and Culture. pp. 105-120. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Leroi-Gourhan. Andre, Pierre Champion, and Monique de Fontanes, eds. (1964). VIe Congres International des Sciences Anthropologigues et Ethnologiques 2. Paris: Musee de I'Homme. leVI-Strauss, Claude (1958). Anthropologie structurale Paris: Pion. ___ (1973). Anthropologle structurale deux. Paris: Pion. ___ (1986). "Avant-propos." In Iconicity: Essays on the Nature of Culture. Paul Bouissac, Michael Herzfeld, and Roland Posner, eds. Tiibmgen: Stauffenburg Verlag. Levi-Strauss, Claude, Roman Jakobson, C. F. Voegelin, and Thomas A. Sebeok (1953). Results of the Coriference ofAnthropologists and Linguists. International Journal ofAmerican Linguistics. Memoir 8. Baltimore: Waverly Press. Lewin, Roger (1984). "No Genome Barriers to Promiscuous DNA." SCience 224(4652): 970- 971. Lieberman, Philip (1975). On the Origins of Languages: An Introduction to the EvolutIOn of Human Speech. New York: Macmillan. Liebman, Ronald, Salvador Minuchin, and Lester Baker (l974a). "An Integrated Program for Anorexia Nervosa." American Journal of Psychiatry 131: 432-435. ___ (I974b). "The Role of the Family in the Treatment of Anorexia Nervosa." Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychology 3: 264-274. Lilly, John C. (1967). The Mind of the Dolphin. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday. Lindemann, Bernhard (1980). Review of Sebeok, The Sign & Its Masters. Journal of Literary Semantics 9(2): 82-84. Linden, Eugene (1976). Apes. Men, and Language. New York: Penguin Books. Loeb, Arthur I. (1976). Space Structures: Their Harmony and Counterpoint. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Loftus, Elizabeth F. (1980). Eyewitness Testimony. Cambridge: Harvard Umverslty Press. Lorenz, Konrad (1971). Studies in Animal and Human BehaVIOur 2. Cambndge: Harvard UnivefSlty Press. ___ (1981). The Foundations of Ethology. New York: Sprmger-Verlag. Lotz, John [Janos] (1962). "Thoughts on Phonology as Applied to the Turkish Vowels." In Ameri• can Studies on Altaic Linguistics. Nicholas Poppe, ed., 13: 343-351. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ___ (1976). "A szemely, szam, viszonyitas es targyhatarozottsag kategotiai a magyarban " In Szonettkoszoru a nyelvrol. Budapest: Gondolat. Lovejoy, Arthur O. (1936). Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Lovelock, James E. (1972). "Gaia as Seen through the Atmosphere." Atmosphere and Environment 6: 579-580. REFERENCES 227

___ (1979). Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ___ (1983). "Daisy World: A Cybernetic Proof of the Gaia Hypothesis." The CoEvolution Quarterly 38: 66-72. Lovelock, James E. and Lynn Margulis (1974a). "Atmosphere Homeostasis by and for the Bio• sphere: The Gaia Hypothesis." Tellus 26(1-2): 2-10. ___ (l974b). "Homeostatic Tendencies of the Earth's Atmosphere." Origins of Life 1: 12-22. Ludel, Jacqueline (1982). "Language Acquisition in Chimps and Dolphins: Anthropocentrism• Still and Again." The CoEvolution Quarterly 36: 46-53. Lumsden, Charles J. and Edward O. Wilson (1981). Genes, Mind, and Culture: The Coevolutionary Process. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ___ (1982). "Precis of Genes, Mind, and Culture," (with commentary by others). The Behav• ioral and Brain Sciences 5: 1-37. MacBryde, Cyril M. and Robert S. Blacklow, eds. (19705). Signs and Symptoms: Applied Patholog• ic Physiology and Clinical Interpretation. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott. McFarland, David (1982). "Interactions Among Animals." In The Oxford Companion to Animal Behavior. David McFarland, ed., pp. 318·-319. Oxford: Oxford Umversity Press. McFeely, William S. (1981). Grant: A Biography. New York: W. W. Norton. McKean, Kevin (1982). "Diagnosis by Computer." Discover 3(9): 62-65. McLaughlin, Robert J. (1981). "Language and Man: Aristotle Meets Koko." Thomist 45: 541-570. Maday, Stefan von (1912). Psychologie des Pferdes und der Dressur. Berlin: Paul Parey. ___ (1914). Gibt es denkende Tiere? Eine Entgegnung auf KraUs "Denkende Tiere". Leipzig and Berlin: Wilhelm Engelmann. Maeterlinck, Maurice (1914). The Unknown GUl'st. Alexander Teixeira de Mattos, trans. New York: Dodd, Mead. Mahony, Patrick (1969 [1951]). The Magic of Maeterlinck. Hollywood: House-Warven. Majno, Guido (1975). The Healing Hand: Man and Wound in the Ancient World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Makridakis, Spyros (1977). "The Second Law of Systems." International Journal of General Systems 4(1): 1-12. Malinowski, Bronislaw (1965 [1935]). The Language of Magic and Gardening. Bloomington: Indi- ana University Press. Maple, Terry L. (1980). Orang-Utan Behavior. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Maple, Terry L. and Michael P. Hoff (1982). Gorilla Behavior. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Margalef, Ramon (1968). Perspectives in Ecological Theory. Chicago: Umversity of Chicago Press. Margulis, Lynn (1970). Origin of Eukaryotic Cells: Evidence and Research Implications for a Theory of the Origin and Evolution of Microbial, Plant, and Animal Cells on the Precambrian Earth. New Haven: Yale University Press. ___ (1971). "Whittaker's Five Kingdoms of Organisms: Minor Revisions Suggested by Consid• erations of the Origin of Mitosis." Evolution 25 (I): 242-245. ___ (1981). Symbiosis in Cell Evolution: Life and Its Environment on the Early Earth. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. Margulis, Lynn and James Lovelock (1974). "Biological Modulation of the Earth's Atmosphere." Icarus 21: 471-489. Margulis, Lynn and Karlene V. Schwartz (1982). Five Kingdoms: An /llustrated Guide to the Phyla of Life on Earth. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. Maritain, Jacques (1957). "Language and the Theory of Sign." In Language: An Inquiry into Its Meaning and Function. Ruth Nanda Anshen, ed., pp. 86-101. New York: Harper & Row. Marney, Milton and Paul F. Schmidt (1976). "Evolution of Scientific Method." In Evolution and Consciousness: Human Systems in Transition. Erich Jantsch and Conrad H. Waddington, eds., pp. 165-197. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. 228 REFERENCES

Marshall, Eliot (1982) "The Senate's Plan for Nuclear Waste." SCIence 216: 709-710. Martinet, Andre (1965). "The Word." Diogenes 51. 38-54. Maruyama, Magoroh (1963). "The Second Cybernetics. Deviation-AmplIfymg Mutual Causal Pro• cesses." American Scientist 51 (2): 164-179. ___ (1976). "Toward Cultural SymbiosIs." In EvolutIOn and ConscIOusness. Human Systems III Transition. Erich Jantsch and Conrad H. Waddington, eds., pp. 198-213. Readmg, Mass.: Addlson-Wesley Marx, Jean L. (\ 984). "Instability m Plants and the Ghost of Lamarck." SCiellce 224(4656): 1415- 1416. Mayr, Ernst (1974). "Teleological and Teleonomlc, A New AnalysIs." In Methodological and Historical Essays ill the Natural alld Social Sciences. Boston Studies m the Philosophy of Science, 14. Robert S. Cohen and Marx W. Wartofsky. eds , pp. 91-117 Dordrecht and Boston: D. Reidel Meehl, Paul E. (1956). "Wanted-A Good Cookbook." American Psychologist II: 263-272. Merchant, Carolyn (1980) The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolulloll. San Francisco: Harper & Row. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (] 964 [1960]). SIRns. Evanston. III.: Northwestern Umversity Press. Merrell, Floyd (1982). Semiotic FoundatIOns: Steps Toward an Epistemology of Wntten Texts. Advances in Semiotics Bloommgton: Indiana University Press. Mertens, Robert (\959). La vie des amphlbiens et reptdes. Paris: Horizons de France. Merton, Robert K. (1948). "The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy." Antioch Rel'im 8: 193-210 Meyer-Holzapfel, Momka (]960) "Uber das Spiel bel Fischen, msbesondere belm Tapirrusselfisch (Mormyrus kannume Forskal)." Der ZooloRisehe Garten (Neue Folge) 25(4): 189-202 Millar, Susanna (1974). The Psychology of Play. New York. Jason Aronson. Miller, BenJamin F. (1978 4 ). The Complete Medical Guide. New York: Simon & Schuster. Miller, Eugene S. (1979). "Hume 's Reduction of Cause to Sign." The New ScilOlasticism 43: 42-75. Miller, James Gner (1978) Living Systems. New York: McGraw-HilI. Miller, James Grier and Jessie L. Miller (\982). "The Earth as a System" Behavioral Science 27 (4): 303-322. Miller, Jonathan (1978). The Body in Question. New York: Random House. Montagu, Ashley (1981). Growing Young. New York: McGraw-HilI. Moore, Peter D. (1983). "ReVival of the Organismal Heresy." Nature 303: 132-133. Morris, Charles W. (1971). Writlllgs on the General Theory of Signs. The Hague: Mouton. Morris, Desmond (1967). The Naked Ape: A ZoolORis!' s Study of the Human Animal. New York: McGraw-HilI. ___ (1977). Manwatching: A Field Guide to Human Behavior. New York: Abrams. Mounin, Georges (1970). Introduction a la semioloRie. Paris: Editions de MmUlt. ___ (1981). "Semiologie medicale et semiologie lingUlstlque.·' Confroll/ations PsychlOtriques 19: 43-58. Mueller, Georg Elias, with Faustinus Edelberg (1915). "Ein Beitrag tiber die Elberfelder Pferde.'· Zeitschrift fur PsycholoRie 73: 258-264. Neelameghan, Arashanapalai (1979). "ExpreSSions of Time in InformatIOn SCience and Their Im• plicatlOns." In Time and the Sciences. Frank Greenaway, cd., pp. 103-118. Pans: UNESCO. Neuberger, Max (1906). Gesehlchte der Medizin I. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke. Nicolis, and lIya Prigogine (1977). Se/j~Organization III NoneqUilibnum Systems: From Dissipative Structures to Order Through Fluctuations New York: Wiley. Nitecki, Matthew H., ed. (1983). Coevolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Nogar, Raymond J. (1963). The Wtsdom of EvolutIOn. New York' Doubleday. ___ (1973). "Aquma" Sartre, and the Lemmmgs." In The Problem of Evolution: A Study of the REFERENCES 229

Philosophical Repercussions of Evolutionary Science. John N. Deely and Raymond J. Nogar, eds., pp. 365-375. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; Indianapolis: Hackett. Norman, Colin (1982). "U.S. Considers Ocean Dumping of Radwastes." Science 215: 1217-1219. Nutting, Charles C. (1884). "On a Collection of Birds From Nicaragua.' Proceedings of the U.S. National Museum 6: 372-410. Odum, Howald T. (1969). Environment, Power and Society. New York: Wiley. ___ (1981). Energy: Basis for Man and Nature. New York: McGraw-Hill. Ogden, Charles K. (1967 [1932]). Opposition: A Linguistic and Psychological Analysis. Bloom• ington: Indiana University Press. Ogden, Charles K. and Ivor A. Richards (1923 [19385]). The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language Upon Thought and the Science of Symbolism. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World. Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko (1983). "Monkey Performances: A Multiple Structure of Meaning and Reflexivity in Japanese Culture." In Text, Play and Story: The Construction of Self and Society. E. Bruner, ed., pp. 278-314. Washington, D.C.: American Ethnological Society. Orians, Gordon and David Rhoades (1983). "Trees Battle Bugs with Signals." Time, 20 June. Orwell, George (1961 [1948]). 1984. New York: New American Library. Osten-Sacken, Carl R. (1877). "A Singular Habit of Hilara." The Entomologist's Monthly Maga- zine 14: 126-127. Overbye, Dennis (1984). "The Mystique of Mars." Discover 5(9): 24-25. Page, Jake (1982). "Call Me Ishmael." Science '82 3(2): 88-89. Pagels, Heinz R. (1982). The Cosmic Code: Quantum Physics as the Language of Nature. New York: Simon & Schuster. Panofsky, Dora and Erwin Panofsky (19622). Pandora's Box: The Changing Aspects of a Mythical Symbol. Bollingen Series, 52. New York: Pantheon. Papini, Giovanni (1970 [1922]). Four and Twenty Minds. Freeport, New York: Books for Libraries Press. Pattee. Howard H., ed. (1973). Hierarchy Theory: The Challenge of Complex Systems. New York: George Braziller. Pattee. Howard H., E. A. Edelsack, Louis Fein and A. B. Callahan, eds. (1966). Natural Automata and Useful Simulations (Proceedings of a Symposium on Fundamental Biological Models, 17 June 1965, Stanford). Washington, D.C.: Spartan Books; London: Macmillan. Patten, Bernard C. and Gregor T. Auble (1980). "Systems Approach to the Concept of Niche." Synthese 43(1): 155-181 = Conceptual Issues in Ecology, special issues, Synthese 43(1) and (2). Patterson, Francine and Eugene Lmden (1982 [1981]). The Education of Koko. London: Andre Deutsch. Peckham, Morse (1965). Man's Rage for Chaos: Biology, Behavior, and the Arts. New York: Schocken. Peirce, Charles S. (1935-66). Collected Papers of . Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss, and Arthur W. Burks, eds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [References are either to volumes and paragraphs (not pages) or to unpublished manuscripts from the Peirce Edition Project located at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis.) ___ (1982 [1857-1866]). Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A Chronological Edition I. Bloom• ington: Indiana University Press. ___ (1984). Writings of Charles S. Peirce. A Chronological Edition 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Peng, Fred C. C., Tomoko Hongo, and Masako Nakawaki (1976). "Nonverbal Expressions of Rituals in Japanese Sumo." Semiotica 17: 1-12. 230 REFERENCES

Percy, Walker (1983). "A Semiotic Primer of the Self." In his Lost in the Cosmos: The Last Self• help Book. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Peters, D. S. (1983). "Evolutionary Theory and Its Consequences for the Concept of Adaptation." In Dimensions of Darwinism: Themes and Counterthemes in Twentieth-Century Evolutionary Theory. Marjorie Grene, ed., pp. 315-327. Cambridge: Cambndge Umversity Press; Pans: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de I'Homme. Pfungst, Oskar (1965). Clever Hans (The Horse ofMr. von Osten). Robert Rosenthal, ed. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston. Phillips, Eustace D. (1973). Greek Medicine. London: Thames & Hudson. Piaget, Jean (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood. New York: Norton. Pimm, Stuart L. (1982). Food Webs. London: Chapman & Hall. Pitkin, Thomas M. (1973). The Captain Departs: Ulysses S. Grant's Last Campaign. Carbondale, III.: Southern Illinois University Press. Pittendrigh, Colin S. (1958). "Adaptation, Natural Selection, and BehavIor." In Behavior and Evolution. Ann Roe and George Gaylord Simpson, eds., pp. 390-416. New Haven: Yale University Press. Poinsot, John (1985 [1632]). Tractatus de Signis. John N Deely, trans .. in consultation with Ralph Austin Powell under the subtitle, The Semiotic of John Poinsot. Berkeley: UmverSIty of Califor• nia Press. Polumn, (1977). "The Body as an Indicator of Health and Disease." In The Anthropology of the Body. John Blacking. ed., pp. 85-98. London: Academic Press. Ponzio, Augusto (1984). "Notes on SemIOtics and Marxism." Recherches Semiotlques/SemlOtic InqUiry 4: 293-302 Posner, Roland, ed. (1984). "Und in aile Ewigkeit ... Kommunikation uber 10000 Jahre: Wle sagen wir unsern Kindeskindern wo der Atommiillliegt?" ZeitschriJt fur Semiotik 6(3). Premack, Ann J. (1976). Why Chimps Can Read. New York: Harper & Row. Premack, David (1976). Intelligence in Apes and Man. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Premack, David, and Anne J. Premack (1983). The Mind of an Ape. New York. Norton. Prigogine, lIya (1962). Introduction to Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics. New York: Wiley- Interscience. ___ (1980). From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. Prigogine, lIya and Isabelle Stengers (1979). La Nouvelle Alliance: Metamorphose de la SCience. Paris: NRF, Gallimard, Bibliotheque des Sciences Humaines. ___ (1984). Order Out of Chaos [rev. & trans. of La Nouvelle Alliance: Metamorphose de la Science (1979)]. New York: Bantam. Prigogine, lIya, Gregoire Nicolis, and Agnes Babloyantz (1972). "Thermodynamics of Evolution." Physics Today 25 (II): 23-28; 25 (12): 38-44. Pringle, Peter and James Spigelman (1981). The Nuclear Barons. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Pritchard, William T. [Will Dexter, pseud.) (1968). This is Magic. New York: Bell. Prodi, Giorgio (1981). "Sintomo/dlagnosi." Enciclopedia: Ricerca-SocializzazlOne 12: 972-992. Pryor, Karen (1984). Don't Shoot the Dog! New York: Simon & Schuster. Randi, James (1980). Flim-Flam: The Truth About Unicorns, Parapsychology. and Other Delusions. New York: Lippincott & Crowell. Ransdell, Joseph (1977). "Some Leading Ideas of Peirce's Semiotic." Semiotica 19(3-4): 157-198 ___ (1979). "Semiotic ObJectivity." Semiotica 26(3-4): 261-288. ___ (1982). "On the Paradigm of Expenence Appropriate for Semiotics." In Semiotics 1980 (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). Michael Herzfeld and Margot D. Lenhart. eds., pp. 427-437. New York: Plenum Press REFERENCES 231

___ (1985). "Peircean Semiotic." Semiotica; forthcoming. ___ (1986). "Charles Sanders Peirce." In Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed. Berlin: Mouton. Rappoport, Roy A. (1979). Ecology, Meaning, and Religion. Richmond, Cal.: North Atlantic Books. Rey, Alain (1973). Theories du signe et du sens. Paris: Klincksieck. Reynolds, Vernon (1980). "The Proper Study of Chumankind." Times Literary Supplement No. 4036. Richet, Charles (l923). Thirty Years of Psychical Research: Being a Treatise on Metaphysics. New York: Macmillan. Ricoeur, Paul (1974). "The Question of the Subject: The Challenge of Semiology." In The Conflict of Interpretations: Essays in Hermeneutics. Don Ihde, ed., pp. 236-266. Evanston, Ill.: North• western University Press. Rietschel, Peter (l975). "Diptera: II. The Flies." In Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia. Franz Bachmaier, Wolfgang Dierl, Eberhard Ernst, Bernhard GfZlmek, Hubert Markl, Werner Rathmayer, Peter Rietschel, Friedrich Schaller, Richard ZurStrassen, Heinz Wundt, and Fritz Zumpt, eds. 2(20}: 493-529. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Rifkin, Jeremy (1980). Entropy: A New World View. New York: Viking Press. Rjeznikov, L. O. (1964). Gnosealogiceskie Voprosy Semiotiki. Leningrad: University. Rumbaugh, E. S., Rumbaugh, D. M., Smith, S. T., and Lawson, J. (1980). "Reference: The Lmguistic Essential." SCience 210: 922-924. Ruppel, G. (1969). "Eine 'Luge' als gerichtete Mitteilung beim Elsfuchs (Alopex lagopus L.)." Zeitschriftfiir Tierpsychologie 26: 371-374. Russell, Anthony (1981). "The Logic of History as a Semiotic Process of Question and Answer in the Thought ofR. G. Collingwood." In Semiotics 1981 (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart. eds., pp. 179-189. New York: Plenum Press. Sagan, Carl (I979). Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of SCience. New York: Random House. Sahal, Devendra (1982). "Structure of Self-organization." Behavioral Science 27 (3): 249-258. Sapir, Edward (1921). Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York: Harcourt Brace Janovich. ___ (l944). "Grading: A Study in Semantics." Philosophy of Science II: 93-116. Sarton, George (1954). Galen of Pergamon. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press. Saussure, Ferdinand de (1972). Cours de linguist/que generale. Tullio de Mauro. ed. Pans: Payot. Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S. (1981). "Can Apes Use Symbols to Represent Their World?" Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 364: 35-59. Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S., Rumbaugh, D. M., and Boysen, S. (1980). "Do Apes Use Language?" American Scientist 68: 49-6\. Savan, DaVid (1983). "Toward a Refutation of Semiotic Idealism." Recherches Semiotiques• Semiotic Inquiry 3: 1-8. Scharfe, Hartmut (1982). "ExpanSIOns: A Study in the Unity of Science." Behavioral Science 27 (3): 214-248. Schechter, Bruce (l981). "The Fine Art of Calculating." Discover 2: 34-38. Schjelderup-Ebbe, Thorlief (1922). "Beltriige zur soztale Psychologle des Haushuhns." Zeitschrift fur Psychologie 88: 225-252. Schmandt-Besserat, Denise (1981). "From Tokens to Tablets: A Re-Evaluatlon of the So-Called 'Numerical Tablets'." Visible Language 15: 321-344. Schneirla, Theodore C. (1965). "Aspects of Stimulation and Orgamzation 10 Approach/Withdrawal Processes in Vertebrate BehaVIOral Development." In Advances in the Study of BehaVIOr. Daniel S. Lehrman et al., eds. I: 2-74. New York: AcademiC Press. 232 REFERENCES

Schultz, Jack C. (1983). "Tree Tactics." Natural History 92(5): 12-25. Scott. John Paul (1969). "The Social Psychology of Infrahuman Animals." In Handbook of Social Psychology. Gardner Lindzey, ed. 4: 611-642. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley. Scruton, Roger (1981). "The Impossibility of SemiotIcs." In his The Politics of Culture and Other Essays, pp. 31-43. Manchester: Carcanet Press. Sebeok, Thomas A. (1951). "Aymara 'Little Red Ridinghood' with Morphological AnalysIs." Archivum Linguisticum 3. 53-69. ___ Ed. (1960). Style in Language. New York: Wiley. ___ (1963). "CommunicatIOn In Animals and Men." Language 39: 448-466. ___ (1965). "Animal Communication." Science 147(3661): 1006-1014. ___ Ed (1968). Animal Communication: Techniques of Study and Results oj Research. Bloom• ington: Indiana UnIversity Press. ___ (1971). Original draft of" 'Semiotics' and Its Congeners." Reprinted In his Contributions to the Doctrine of Signs, pp. 47-58. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press. ___ (1972). PerspectIves in Zoosemiotlcs. The Hague: Mouton. ___ (l974a). "SemIOtics: A Survey of the State of the Art." In Current Trends In Linguistics. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed. 12(1-2): 211-264. The Hague: Mouton ___ (1974b). Structure and Texture. The Hague: Mouton. ___ (I975a). "Zoosemiotics: At The Intersection of Nature and Culture." In The Tell-Tale Sign. A Survey of SemIOtics. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., pp. 85-96. Llsse: Peter de Ridder Press ___ (l975b). "The Semiotic Web: A Chronicle of Prejudices." Bulletin of Literary Semiotics 2: 1-63. Reprinted in his ContributIOns to the Doctrine of SIgns, pp. 149-188. ___ Ed. (I975c). Current Trends In Linguistics, 12(3-4) = Linguistics and Adjacent Arts and Sciences. The Hague: Mouton. ___ (1976). Contributions to the Doctrine of SIgns. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press. ___ (1977a). "Zoosemiotic Components of Human Communication." In HoII' Animals Commu• nicate. Thomas A. Sebeok. ed .. pp. 1055-1977. ___ (l977b). "Ecumenicahsm In SemiotIcs." InA PeifuslOn of Signs. Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., pp. 180-206. ___ Ed. (1977c). A PeifuslOn of Signs. Advances in SemiotIcs. Bloomington: Indiana UnIversity Press. ___ Ed. (I 977d). How Animals Communicate. Bloomington: Indiana UniverSity Press ___ (1978). "Note on Martin Gardner and Charles Morns." Semiotica 23: 1-4. ___ (1979). The SIgn & Its Masters. AustIn: University of Texas Press. ___ (1980). "Man and Animal!Man and Man. ConversatIOn with Tadayoshl Hlmeda and Masao Yamaguchi" Kokusm K6ryii 24: 10-16. ___ (l98Ia). "Karl Buhler." In Die Welt als Zelchen. Klasslker der Modernen Semiotik. MartIn Krampen et al.. eds., pp. 205-232 Berhn: Severin und Siedler. ___ (l981b). The Play of Musement. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ___ (1984). "Symptom." In New DirectIOns in Linguistics and Semiotics. James E. Copeland, ed., pp. 211-230. Houston. Rice Uruverslty Press. Sebeok, Thomas A. and Alexandra Ramsay (1969). Approaches to Animal Communication The Hague: Mouton. Sebeok, Thomas A. and Robert Rosenthal, eds. (\981). Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 364 = The Clever Hans Phenomenon: CommumcatlOn with Horses. Whales. Apes, and People. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. Sebeok, Thomas A. and Jean Umlker-Sebeok. eds. (\980). Speaking of Apes. A Critical Anthology of Two-Way CommunicatIOn with Man. New York: Plenum Press. Sebeok, Thomas A , Alfred S. Hayes. and Mary Catherine Bateson (1972 [1964]). Approaches to SemlOtlcs. Cultural Anthropology. EducatIOn. LingUIstics. Psychiatry. Psychology (Tran~ac- REFERENCES 233

tions of the Indiana University Conference on Paralinguistics and Kinesics). Janua Linguarum, Series Major, 15. The Hague: Mouton. Seidenberg, Mark S. and Laura A. Pettlto (1981). "Ape Signing: Problems of Method and In• terpretation." In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 364 = The Clever Hans Phe• nomenon: Communication with Horses, Whales, Apes and People. Thomas A. Sebeok and Robert Rosenthal, eds., pp. 115-129. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. Seielstad, George A. (1983). Cosmic Ecology: The View From the Outside In. Berkeley: University of California Press. Shands, Harley C. (1970). Semiotic Approaches to Psychiatry. The Hague: Mouton. Shank, Gary D., ed. (1984). Paradigms for Empirical Semiotics. Toronto Semiotic Circle Mono- graph, Number 3. Shanon, Benny (1978). "The Genetic Code and Human Language." Synthese 39: 401-415. Shapiro, Fred C. (1981). Radwaste. New York: Random House. Shapiro, Michael (1983). The Sense of Grammar: Language as Semeiotic. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Sherzer, Joel (1971). "Conference on Interaction Ethology." Language Sciences, 14: 19-21. Sick, Helmut (1973). "Family: Manakins." In Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia. Bernhard Grzimek, Wilhelm Meise, Gunther Niethammer, and Joachim Steinbacher, eds., 9(4): 157- 160. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Siegel, Rudolf E. (1973). Galen on Psychology, Psychopathology, and Function and Diseases of the Nervous System: An Analysis of His Doctrines, Observations and Experiments. Basel: S. Karger. Simon, Herbert A. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial (Karl Taylor Compton Lectures, 1968). Cambridge: MIT Press. ___ (1973). "The Organization of Complex Systems." In Hierarchy Theory: The Challenge of Complex: Systems. Howard H. Pattee, ed , pp. 1-27. New York: George Braziller. Singer, Milton (1980). "Signs of the Self: An Exploration in Semiotic Anthropology." American Anthropologist 82(3): 485-507. ___ (1984). Man's Glassy Essence: Explorations in Semiotic Anthropology. Bloomington: Indi- ana University Press. Skinner, B. F. (1979). The Shaping of a Behaviorist. New York: Knopf. ___ (1983). "Origins of a Behaviorist." Psychology Today 17(9): 22-33. Siobodkin, L. B. (i 968). "Toward a Predictive Theory of Evolution." In Population Biology and Evolution. Richard C. Lewontin, ed., pp. 187-205. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press. Slud, Paul (1957). "The Song and Dance of the Long-Tailed Manakin, Chiroxiphia linearis." The Auk: A Quarterly Journal of 74: 333-339. Smith, Charles J. (1975). "Problems with Entropy in Biology." BioSystems 7:259-265. Smith, Temple F. and Harold J. Morowitz (1982). "Between History and Physics." Journal of Molecular Evolution 18: 265-282. Smuts, Jan Christian (1926). Holism and Evolution. New York: Macmillan. Snow, David W. (1963). "The Evolution of Manakin Displays." In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Ornithological Congress, Ithaca, 1962, pp. 553-561. Snow, Sir Charles Percy (1959). The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press. ___ (19642). The Two Cultures: And a Second Look. Cambridge: Cambridge Universtty Press. Snowdon, Charles T. and Jayne Cleveland (1980). "Individual Recognition of Contact Calls by Pygmy Marmosets." Animal Behavior 28: 717-727. Snyder, C. R., Randee Jae Shenkel, and Carol R. Lowery (1977). "Acceptance of Personality Interpretations: The 'Barnum Effect' and Beyond." Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy• chology 45: 104-114. 234 REFERENCES

Snyder, Paul (1978). Toward One Science: The Convergence of Traditions. New York: St. Martin's Press. Societe de Linguistique de Paris (1868). Memoires de la Socihe de Linguistique de Paris, I: 3. Paris: A. Franck. Spencer-Brown, G. [a.k.a. James Keys] (1972). Only Two Can Play This Game. New York: Julian Press. Spuhler, James N. (1977). "Biology, Speech, and Language." In Annual Review of Anthropology, 6: 509-561. Palo Alto, Cal.: Annual Reviews. Staal, J. F. (1971). "What Was Left of Pragmatics m Jerusalem." Language Sciences 14: 29-32. Staiano, Kathryn Vance (1979) "Semiotic Defimtion of Illness." Semiotica 28: 107-125. ___ (1982). "Medical Semiotics: Redefining an AnCient Craft." Semiotica 38: 319-346. Stankiewicz, Edward (1974). "The Dithyramb to the Verb in the Eighteenth- and Nineteenth- Century Linguistics." In Studies in the History of Linguistics: Traditions and Paradigms. Dell Hymes, ed., pp. 157-190. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Steiner, George (1984). "The Scandal of the Nobel Prize." The New York Times Book Review, Sept. 30. Stokes, Adrian (1973). A Game That Must Be Lost; Collected Papers. Cheadle, Cheshire, England: Carcanet Press. Stonehouse, Bernard, ed. (1978). Animal Marking: Recognitwn Marking of Ammals in Research. Baltimore: University Park Press. Stonehouse, Bernard and Christopher Perrins, eds. (1977). Evolutionarv Ecology. Baltimore: Uni• versity Park Press. Sudd, John H. (1967). An Introduction to the Behavior of Ants. London: Edward Arnold. Swanson, Carl P. (1983 [1965, 1954]). Ever-Expanding Horizons: The Dual Informational Sources of Human Evolution. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. Symons, Julian (1978). The Tell-Tale Heart. The Life and Works of Edgar Allan Poe. New York: Harper & Row. Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre (1959). The Phenomenon of Man. Bernard Wall, trans. New York: Harper & Row. Temerlin, Maurice K. (1975). Lucy: Growing Up Human: A Chimpanzee Daughter in a Psycho• therapist's Family. Palo Alto: Science and Behavior Books. Temkin, Oswei (1973). Galenism: Rise and Declme of a Medical Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Terrace, Herbert S. (1979). Nim. New York: Knopf. Therien, Gilles (1982). Review of The Play of Musement by Thomas A. Sebeok. Recherches Semiotique-Semwtic Inquiry 2(2): 178-180. Thorn, Rene (1968). "Topologie et signification." L'Age de la science 4: 219-242. ___ (1970). "Topologie et linguistique." In Essays on Topology and Related Topics; MemOlres dtidies a Georges de Rham. Andre Haefliger and Raghavan Narasimhan, eds., pp. 226-248. New York: Heidelberg, and Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ___ (1973). "De l'icone au symbole: esquisse d'une theorie du symbolisme." Cahiers Interna• tionaux de Symbohsme 22/23:85-106. ___ (1974). "La linguistique, discipline morphologique exemplaire." Critique 30: 235-245. ___ (l975a). Structural Stability and Morphogenesis: An Outline of a General Theory of Mod- els. D. H. Fowler, trans. Reading, MA: The Benjamin/Cummings Publishmg Company. ___ (l975b). "Les mathematiques et I'intelligible." Dialectica 29(1): 71-80. ___ (1978). "De quoi faut-il s'etonner?" Circe 8-9. ___ (1980a). "L'espace et les signes." SemiotlCQ 29 (3-4): 193-208. ___ (1980b). Modeles mathematiques de la morphogenese. Paris: Christian Bourgois. ___(1983). Mathematical Models of Morphogenesis. Chichester: Ellis Horwood. REFERENCES 235

Thomas, Edward (1974 [1912]). Maurice Maeterlinck. New York: Haskell House. Thomas, Lewis (1984). "Essay." Discover 5(2): 33-34. Thompson, John N. (1982). Interaction and Coevolution. New York: Wiley-Interscience. Thompson, Michael (1979). Rubbish Theory' The Creation and Destruction of Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Thullier, Pierre (1983). "Oil va Ie 'neo-mecanicisme'?" Review of L'auto-organization de la physique au politique (Proceedings of a colloquium at Censy, 1981). P. Dumouchel and J.-P. Dupuy, eds. La Recherche 14(146): 1013-1015. Timaeus, Ernst (1974). Experiment und Psychologie: Zur Sozialpsychologie Psychologische Experi- mentierens. Gottingen: C. J. Hogrefe. Timmermans, Bernardus (1924). Le Spinozisme de Maeterlinck. Zalt-Bommell: Van de Garde. Tomkins, Gordon W. (1975). "The Metabolic Code." Science 189: 760-763. Uexkiill, Jakob von (1940 [1928]). "Bedeutungslehre." Bios 10. Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth. [Barry Stone and Herbert Weiner, trans., "The Theory of Meaning," Semiotica 42(1) (1982): 25-85, issue ed. by Thure von Uexkidl.) ___(1957 (1934)). "A Stroll Through the World of Animals and Men; a Picture Book of Invisible Worlds." In Instinctive Behavior: The Development of a Modern Concept. Claire H. Schiller, trans., ed., pp. 5-80. New York: International Universities Press. ___ (1980). Kompositionslehre der Natur. Frankfurt am Main: Ullstein. Uexkiill, Thure von (l982a). "Meaning and Science in Jakob von Uexkiill's Concept of Biology." Semiotica 42(1): 1-24. ___ (l982b). "Semiotics and Medicine." Semiotica 38: 205-215. ___ (1982c). "Semiotics and the Problem of the Observer." In Semiotics 1982. (Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart, eds. New York: Plenum Press. Uexkiill, Thure von et al., eds. (1979). Lehrbuch der Psychosomatischen Medizin. Munich: Urban und Schwarzenberg. Ullman,l. M. (1975). Psycholinguistik und Psychosemiotik. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht. Ullman, Stephen (1951). Principles of Semantics. Glasgow: Jackson, Son & Co. Umiker-Sebeok, Jean and Thomas A. Sebeok (1979) .• 'Performing Animals: Secrets of the Trade." Psychology Today 13 (6): 78-91. ___ (1980). "Introduction: Questioning Apes." In Speaking of Apes. Thomas A. Sebeok and Jean Umiker-Sebeok, eds., pp. I-59. ___ (1981). "Clever Hans and Smart Simians: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy and Kindred Meth• odological Pitfalls." Anthropos 76: 89-165. Varela, F. G., H. R. Maturana, and R. Uribe (1974). "Autopoiesis: The Organization of Living Systems, Its Characterization and a Model." BioSystems 5: 187-196. Vidal, Gore (1976). 1876. New York: Random House. Waal, Frans B. M. de and Jan A. R. A. M. van Hooff (1981). "Side-Directed Communication and Agnostic Interactions in Chimpanzees." Behaviour 77 (3): 164-198. Wachtel, Paul (1980). "Investigation and Its Discontents: Some Constraints on Progress in Psycho• logical Research." American Psychologist 35: 399-408. Waddington, C. H. (1960). "Evolutionary Adaptation." In The Evolution of Life (= Vol. I of Evolution After Darwin), Sol Tax, ed., pp. 381-402. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Waldrop, M. Michell (1984). "An Inquiry into the State of the Earth." Science 226(4670): 33- 35. Watson, Andrew, James E. Lovelock, and Lynn Margulis (1978). "Methanogenesis, Fires and the Regulation of Atmospheric Oxygen." BIOSystems 10: 293-298. Waugh, Linda R. (1982). "Marked and Unmarked: A Choice Between Unequals in Semiotic Struciure." Semiotica 38: 299-318. 236 REFERENCES

Wechsler, Judith (l97S). "Introduction." In On Aesthetics in Science, Judith Wechsler, ed ,pp. 1- 7. Cambridge: MIT Press. Welgin, Xie (I9SI). "A l'aube de la vie, la naissance du code genetique." La Recherche 12 (125): 1000-100S. Wells, Rulon (1967). "Distinctively Human Semiotic." Social SCience Information 6 (6): 103-124. Wesley, James Paul (1974). Ecophysic.\"" The Application of Phvsic.~ to Ecolo~y. Springfield. III.: Charles C. Thomas. Wheeler, John Archibald (1977). "Genesis and Observershlp." In FoundatIOnal Problems 1f1 the Special Sciences. Robert E. and K. Jaakko Hintlkka. eds .. pp. 3-33. Dordrecht: Reidel. Whittaker, R H (1969). "New Concepts of Kingdoms of Organisms." Science 163(3863): 150- 159. Whittaker, R. H. and Lynn Margulis (1978). "Protist Classification and the Kingdoms of Orga• nisms." BioSystems 10: 3-IS. Wickler, Wolfgang (1968). in Plants and Animals. New York: McGraw-HilI. Wiener, Norbert (1950). The Human Use of Human Bein~s: Cybernetics and S(men·. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Wilden, Anthony (1972). System and Structure: Essays in CommunicatIOn and Exchange. London: Tavistock Publications. Wiley, E. O. and Daniel R. Brooks (1982). "Victims of Hlstory-A Nonequilibrium Approach to Evolution." Systematic Zoolo~y 31(1): 1-24. ___ (1983). "NoneqUilibrium Thermodynamics and Evolution: A Response to Lovtrup." Svs• temallc Zoolog.v 32(2): 209-219. Will, Manlyn Major (1979). "The Health of Charles S Peirce: A Semiotic Perspective." Un• published Manuscript. Williams, Brooke (1983). "History as a Semiotic Anomaly." In SemIOtics 1983 (Proceedings of the SemIOtic Society of America). John N. Deely and Margot D. Lenhart, cds. New York: Plenum Press. ___ (1985). "What Has History To Do with Semiotic'?" SemlOtica 54: 267-333. Wilson, Edward O. (1962). BehaVIOr of Armigerum (Latreille). Cambndge: The Museum. ___ (l971a). The Insect Societies. Cambridge: Harvard UniverSity Press ___ (1971 b). "The Prospects for a Unified Sociobiology." American SCIentist 59: 400-403 ___ (1975). Sociobiology. The New Synthesis. Cambndge: Harvard UniverSity Press. ___ (1978). On Human Nature. New York: Bantam. Wlnance, Eleuthere (1983). Review article in Revue Thomiste 83(3): 514-516. Winograd, Isaac J. (1981). "Radioactive Waste Disposal in Thick Unsaturated Zones. " Science 212: 1457-1464. Woese, Carl R. (1981). "Archaeobacteria." Scientific American 244(6): 98-122. Yates, F. Eugene, and Peter N. Kugler (1982). "Outline of a Physical Theory of Physiological Systems." Canadian Journal of Physiologv and Pharmacolo~y 60(3): 217-248. ___ (1985). "Signs, Singularities and Significance: A Physical Model for SemIOtics." Seml• otica 52: 49-77. Yunis, Jorge J., Jeffrey R. Sawyer, and Kelly Dunham (1980). "The Striking Resemblance of High• Resolution G-Banded Chromosomes of Man and Chimpanzees." Science 208. 1145-1148. Zeleny, Milan, ed. (1980). Autopoiesis, Dissipative Structures, and Spontaneous Social Orders AAAS Selected Symposium, 53. Boulder, Col: Westview Press. Index of Names

Ackoff, Russell L., 28, 215 Babloyantz, Agnes, 37, 230 Bateson, Mary Catherine, Adam, Villiers de J'Isle, 115 Bachmaier, Franz, 231 24,216, 232 Adams, Henry, 206 Bacon, Francis, 71 Batty, Michael, 29, 216 Adams, Michael Vannoy, Bacon, Roger, 71 Baxtin, Mikhail, 183 215 Baer, Eugen, viii, 46, 50, Beatles, The, 75 Adams, Richard Newbold, 215 Becker, T., 134 viii, 29. 37, 215 Bahnson, C. B., 6 Beckmann, Max, 170 Agrippa, Cornelius, 175 Bahnson, M. B., 6 Beer, Colin G., 216 Alcmaeon of Croton, 46, 51 Bailly, Auguste, 99, 108, Behan, Richard J., 55, 216 Aldis, Owen, 84, 86, 215 113,216 Bekoff, Marc, 88 Allen, Peter M., 29, 215 Baker, Lester, 47, 226 Bell, Joseph, 58 Allen, T. F. H., 22, 37, 215 Baldwin, Ian T., 20, 216 Benoist, Jean-Marie, 83, Allison, Harrison c., 83, Ballard, Carroll, 187 216 215 Barber, Janet M., 60, 216 Bense, Max, 77, 216 Alpher, Ralph A., 215 Bargatzky, Walter, 20, 32, Benveniste, Emile, 8, 216 Ames, Bruce N., 40, 216 216 Bergson, Henri, 113 Anderson, J. R. L., 62, 63, Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua, 68, Berkeley, George, 74 220 72,216 Berlinski, David, 29, 216 Anderson, Myrdene, 17-18, Barnett, S. A., 211 Berofsky, Bernard, 116 40,75,215 Barnum, P. T., 207, 234 Bertalanffy, Ludwig von, Andrews, Michael, 140, 215 Barrett, Sir William F., 29,216 Angell, James R., 208 103 Berto (horse), 92, 103, 109- Anshen, Ruth Nanda, 227 Barrie, J. M., 186 110, Ill, 112 Aquinas, Thomas, 228 Barthes, Roland, 48, 70, Bethe, Hans, 215 Aristotle, 46, 202, 203, 227 184, 216, 226 Bidder, George Parker, 108, Armstrong, Daniel, 220 Bartlett, Sir Frederick C., 216 Attenborough, David, 215 14,216 Billington, James H., xv Auble, Gregor T., 22, 23, Bastide, Roger, 216 Bilz, Rudolf, 50, 216 229 Bates, Henry W.o 128, 216 Binyon, T. J., 210 Augustine, Saint, 50, 215 Bateson, Gregory, 12, 29, Birdwhistell, Ray L., 68 Austin, George A., 217 31, 89, 90, 96, 216 Black, Max, 72

237 238 INDEX OF NAMES

Blacking, John, 230 Buttel-Reepen, H. von, 106 Collingwood, R. G., 21, Blacklow, Robert S., 46, Buyssens, Eric, 83 231 54, 227 Colman, Andrew M., 223 Blitzer, Charles, xv Cabe, Patrick A., 164,217 Conrad, Michael, 28. 33, Bloomfield, Leonard. 69 Caesar, , I, 162 38, 218 Boas, Franz, 69 Cairns-Smith, A. G., 35, Copeland, James G . 45. Bochner, Barry R., 40, 216 38,217 232 Bogart, Dodd H., 153, 160, Calame-Griaule, Genevieve, Coquet, J. c., 218 216 72 Coming, Peter A., 37, 218 Bonasone, Giulio, 169 Callahan, A. B., 229 Count, Earl W., 22, 31, 218 Bongo, Pietro, 175 Capelle, Thorsten, 9, 217 Courtes, Joseph, 70, 222 Bonner, John Tyler, 192, Caplan, David, 91, 190, Cracraft, Joel, 37, 220 217 191, 217 Crail, Ted, 218 Bookchin, Murray, 37, 217 Carducci, Giosue, 99 Crichton, Michael, 202, Borges, Jorge Luis, 183 Carey, James R., 20, 224 203, 204, 205, 218 Borgese, Elizabeth, 206 Carr, Gerald F .. 219 Crick, Francis, 189 Bottcher, Ursula, 93 Carter, Brandon, II, 77. Crito,64 Bouissac, Paul, viii, x, xi, 217 Crook, John Hurrell, 28. 18,61,71.75,82,217, Cassirer, Ernst, 21, 92, 217 218 221. 226 Chadwick, John, 52. 217 Crookshank, F. G., 46 Boulding, Kenneth E., 29, Chalmers, Neil R., 89, 218 Crusoe. Robinson. 186 217 Chamberlain, Ernest N., 46. Curtis, James M., 24, 218 Bouma, Herman, 221 218 Cuvier, Georges. 212 Boyle, T. Coraghessan. 204 Champion, Pierre, 226 Boysen, Sally, 231 Champollion, Jean-Franc;ois, Bozzano, Ernest, 100 166 Dahon, Renee, 116 Bredehoeft. John D., 151, Chance, M. R. A., 128, Daiches, David, 62-63, 218 217 218 Damay, Arsen, 168, 218 Breder, Charles M .• 84 Chao, Yuen Ren, 68 Darwin, Charles, 27. 32, Bremermann, Hans J., 33, Chapin, James Paul, 139. 90. 131, 184, 211, 218 217 218 Davies, Nicholas B., 23, Br~ndal, Viggo, 70 Charles II, I 219, 225 Bronowski, Jacob, 191 Chauvin, Remy, 144, 192. Davies, Paul, 35, 77, 218 Brooks, Daniel R., 37, 236 218 da Vinci, Leonardo, 197 Brown, Richard E., 83, 84, Cheraskin, Emanuel, 56, Dawkins, Richard. 3, 24, 217 218 31,41,218 Bruner. Edward, 229 Cherry, E. Colin, 159,218 Deely, John, Viii, 17-18, Bruner, Jerome S., 14,65. Chisholm, Roderick M., 19, 20, 21. 22, 23, 28, 217 127, 218 31,34,35.215,217. Buckley. Walter, 29. 217 Chomsky, Noam, 12, 65, 219,225,229.230.231. Buczynska-Garewicz, 85,91. 191, 198,200. 235. 236 Hanna, viii, 217 206. 218 de Fontanes. Momque, 226 Biihler. Karl, 21, 48-49, Claparede, Edouard, 108 De Lacy, Estelle Allen, 219 65,217.232 Cleveland. Jayne. 88, 233 De Lacy, Phillip Howard, Bunge, Mario, 74, 217 Clever Hans See Hans, 52,219 Burks, Arthur W .. 229 Kluge Delbriick. Max, 24, 219 Burnet, James, 7. 217 Cochran, Doris M .• 132, Deledalle, Gerard, 70. 219 Bums, Susan, Xlii, 126, 131 218 de Mauro. Tullio. 231 Butler. Christopher, 175, Cohen, Robert S .. 228 Derrida, Jacques, 175. 176. 176, 217 Colby, Kenneth Mark, 53, 219 Butler, Samuel, 184 218 Descartes, Rene. 8, 74 INDEX OF NAMES 239

Desmond, Adrian, 189, 190, Emery, Fred E., 29, 215 Freud, Sigmund, 178, 220, 191, 192,207,219 Epimetheus, 168 225 Dewey, John, 63. 67 Epple, Gisela, 83 Freudenthal, Hans, 171,221 Dewsbury, D. A., 211, 219 Epstein, Robert, 66, 21O, Fnedmann, Herbert, 137, Dicke, Robert H., II, 77 220 139, 221 Dickerson, Richard E., 35, Ernst, Eberhard, 231 FrIsch, Karl von, 85 219 Eryximachus, 61 Frost, Robert, 66 Dickinson, Emily, 97 Eschbach, Achim, 64, 219, Fuller, R. Buckminster. 6, Dickinson, Peter, 204 220 7, 221 Diener, T. 0., 33, 219 Esposito, Joseph L., 177, Furness, William H., 199, Dierl, Wolfgang, 231 220 208, 221 Dillman, Peter A., 60, 216 Eucken, Rudolf c., 99 Futuyma, Douglas J., 31, Dillon, Wilton S., xiii, 220 Ewart, Gavin, vii 221 Dixson, A. F., 203, 219 Ewer, R. F., 88 Dobert, R., 25, 219 Ewert, J.-P., 211, 220 Galen, 52-53, 60, 71, 80, Dog, Pavlov's, 98 221, 225 Donnert, Karoly, 93 Fabrega, Horacio, Jr., 46, Gamow, George, 179,215, dos Santos. Joao, 136 48,60, 220 221 Douglas, John H., I, 2, 8 Fairbanks, Matthew J., 3, 6, Gardin, Jean-Claude, x, 75, Doyle, Arthur Conan, 58, 220 221 174,175,182 Falk, Dean, x, 220 Gardiner, William, 220 Duguid, James, 151, 225 Fanshel, David, 46, 225 Gardner, Howard, viii, 221 Dumouchel. 1'., 235 Farley, Walter, 187 Gardner, Martin, 64, 76, 99, Dunham, Kelly, 236 Feehan, Thomas D., 127, 104, III. 191, 197, 199, Dupin, C. Auguste, 175, 218 221, 232 176, 182 Fein, Greta, 89, 220, 229 Gatlin, Lila L., 31, 221 Dupuy, J.-P., 235 Fein, Louis, 229 Gelb, Ignace J., 166, 221 Feinberg, Gerald, 165, 220 Gell-Mann, Murray, 177, Eccles, Sir John, 74, 219 Fernald, Dodge, 4, 220 221 Eco, Umberto, 19,50,51, Ferris, Stephen, 33, 220 Gerard, Ralph W., 28, 34, 59,62,68, 80, 174,219, Fiedler, Leslie, 174 221 221 Finesinger, Jacob E., 47 Geschwind. Nonnan, 91, Eddington, Arthur Stanley, Firth, J. R, 63, 72 190, 191 vii Firth, Raymond, 63, 220 Ginzburg. Carlo, 50, 51,58, Edelberg, Faustinus, 106, Fisch, Ma:>. H., 178, 181, 221 107,108.109,110, III, 220 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang 112, 228 Fiske, Richard, x v von, I Edelsack, E. A., 229 Flipper (dolphin), 93 Goffman, Erving, 71, 83, Edwards, Paul, 224 Florence, P. Sargant, 62, 221 Eggan, Fred, 64 63, 220 Goldstein, Jeffrey H .. 89, Ehrlich, Paul, 31, 220 F1orkin, Marcel, 24, 40, 220 221 Eibl-Eibesfeldt. Ireniius, 85 Flournoy, Theodore, 100, Goldwyn, Samuel, 102 Eigen, Manfred, 33, 37, 41, 103, 220 GolopenJia-Eretescu, Sanda, 220 Foote, Kenneth E., x, 75, viii,221 Eisenberg, J. F., xiii, 220 221 Goodnow, Jacqueline J., Eisenberg, John, 132, 220 Forge, Anthony, 72 217 Eldredge, Niles, 37, 38, 220 Fort, Paul, 115 Gopnik, Myrna, 198. 199, Ellsworth, Gretchen, xv Fortes, Meyer, 72 200,201,221 Elstein, Arthur S., 48, 60, Fossey, Diane, 93 Gould, Stephen Jay, 15, 28, 220 Fowler, D. H., 234 34,37,40, 190,221,222 Elton, C. S , 22, 27, 220 Fox, Michael W., 5 Goulet, John, 204, 205 240 INDEX OF NAMES

Giiz, H., 85 Hartman, Hyman. 33. 41, Holling, C. S., 31, 223 Grant. Ulysses S., I, 2, 3, 222 Holmes, Sherlock, 53, 74, 6,7,8,9 Hartshorne, Charles, 229 174, 175, 178, 182 Greenaway, Frank, 228 Harvey (Rabbit), 204 Hooff, Jan A. R. A. M. Greenberg. Joseph c., 223 Hawkes, Terence. 80, 222 van, 28, 235 Gregory, Richard L., 3, 4, Hayes, Alfred S., 232 Horder, Lord, 58 206, 222 Hayes, Cathenne H., 205, Hornbostel. E. M. von, 99 Greimas, Algirdas Juhen, 222 Howard, H. Eliot, 88. 223 70, 222 Hediger, Hemi, 66, 82, 84, Huff, Theodore. 187, 223 Grene. Marjorie. 230 86,87,92,93, 104, 139, Hull, David, 31, 223 Griffin, Donald R .. 22. 193, 197,206,209,222 Hume, David, 228 222 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Humperdinck. Engelbert, Gnnnell, Joseph, 22, 222 Friedrich, I, 176-177 186 Gros Louis. Kenneth R. R .. Heidel, Wilham Arthur, 46, Humphreys, Willard C , 54. xvi 51, 222 223 Gmmek, Bernhard, 223, Heinroth, Oskar, 87. 99, Hunt, Morton, 197, 223 231, 233 196 Huntingford, Felicity, 32, GUiraud, Pierre. 70, 222 Heinze, Max, 4, 222 223 Gulliver, 76 Heisenberg. Werner, 76, Hutchinson, Bruce, 29, 216 Gwmner, Eberhard, 86, 222 222 Hutchinson. G. Evelyn, 22, Henle. Friedrich J. K., 55 31, 223 Haeckel. Ernst Heinrich, 27 Hephaestus, 168 Huxley, Juhan, 212 Haefliger, Andre. 234 Heraclitus, 3, 4 Hyman, Ray, 207, 223 Hagen, Margaret A., 164, Herodotus, IX Hymes, Dell, 234 217, 222 Herzfeld, Michael, xi, 217. Haggard, H. Rider, 202, 226, 230 Ihde, Don, 231 203 Hesiod, 167 Ingram, David, 223 Hallman, Jack, 222 Heusser, Hans Rudolf, 132, Haken. Hermann, 28, 222 222 Hall, Edward T .. 24, 222 Heyner, Annin, 211, 223 Jacob, Fran~Ols, 14, 73, Halls, Wilfred D., 97, 105, Heyse, Karl W. L., 7 162, 190, 223 109, 222 Heyse, Paul J. L., 99 Jakobson, Roman, 7, 8, 41. Hans, Kluge (Clever) Himeda, Tadayo~hi, 118, 49.60,61. 65, 66, 67, (horse), 92, 103, 108, 119,121,232 68-69,72, 152. 162, 123, 145. 192, 194, 195, Hinde, Robert A., 211, 212, 181. 219, 223, 224, 226 200,206,207,208. 230, 213, 223 James, William, 65. 174. 232. 235 Hmtlkka. K. Jaakk~, 236 182, 224 Hlmschen (horse), 103, 109 Hinttkka, Robert E , 236 Jantsch, Erich, 29, 37, 215, Hansmann. A., 22, 222 Hippocrates, 46, 50, 51-52, 223, 224. 227, 228 Haraway, Donna Jean, 24. 57,60.80. 153, 154, Jastrow, Joseph, 35, 104, 222 217, 223 224 HardWick, Charles S .• 4. Hirose, Shizumu, 118, 120. Jastrow, Robert, 224 73,79, 176,222 121, 223 Jensen, Uffe J., 219. 223, Harlow, Harry F., 88, 222 Hirsch, Morris W., 29, 223 226 Harre, Rom, 219, 223, 226 HJelmslev, Louis, 68, 69, Jerison, Harry J., 41, 224 Harris, James. 7. 222 70. 223 Jewell, Peter Arundel, 85, Hamson, J. M .• x. 222 Hockett, Charles E., 41. 223 224 Hamson, Jane E .. 167, 168. Hoebens, Piet. 145 Johansson, Thomas B., 170, 222 Hoff, Michael P., 206. 227 224 Hartkopf. A , 108 Holenstem, Elmar, 9, 223 Johnson, Barbara, 176, 224 INDEX OF NAMES 241

Johnson, Harry Miles, 148, Koko (primate), 93, 145, Leach, Sir Edmund R., 63, 224 204 72, 74, 212, 226 Johnson, Victor R., 84, 224 Kolers, Paul A., 221 Lee, Dorothy, 24, 226 Johnston, Timothy D., 28, Korzybski, Alfred, 152 Le Guin, Ursula K., 202 224 Kots, Nadezhda Nikolaevna Lehrman, Daniel S., 216, Jolly, C. J., 212 (Ladygina). 205, 225 231 Jones, Roger S., 24, 224 Kotschi, Th., 70 Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm Judson, Horace Freeland, Kotzwinkle, William, 185, von, 13, 14 189 186, 187, 188,225 Lenhart, Margot D., 20, Krall, Karl. 103, 104. 105. 217,219,225,230,231, 106, 108, 109, III, 112, 235. 236 Kael, Pauline, 185, 224 225 Leroi-Gourhan, Andre, 72, Kahn, David, 166, 224 Krampen, Martin, II. 17, 226 Kahn, Otto, 101 20,21,22,65,70,215, Le Roy, Gregoire, 115 Kama (elephant), 92, 103, 225, 232 Levi-Strauss, Claude, 67, 112 Krebs, John R., 23,41, 68, 69, 72, 226 Kant, Immanuel (philoso• 218, 219. 225 Lewin, Roger, 33, 226 pher), 21, 73, 74, 176- Knsteva, Julia, 183, 225 Lewontin, Richard c., 233 m Kroeber, Alfred, 192 Lieber, Francis, 21 Karban, Richard, 20, 224 Krohn, Kaarle, 212. 225 Lieberman, Philip, 206, 226 Katz, David, 104, 224 Kugler, Peter N., 40. 77, Liebman, Ronald, 47, 226 Kawai, Masao, 224 236 Liepmann, Agathe, 98 Kelber, Wilhelm, 4, 224 Kuhn, Carolus Gottlob, 225 Liepmann, Hugo, 98, 99 Keller, Robert, 86, 224 Kuhn. Thomas S .. 18, 225 Liepmann, Kate, 98, 99 Kellog, L. A., 205, 224 Lilly. John C .. 209, 210, Kellog, W. N., 205, 224 226 Kendon, Adam, 213 Lablanc, Georgette. 115 Lindemann, Bernhard, viii, Kennedy, John M., 164, Labov, Wllliam, 46, 225 226 224 Lacan, Jacques, 66, 175, Linden, Eugene, 192, 205, Kenny, A. J. P., 41, 224 176, 225 206, 207, 226, 229 Kerferd, G. B., 4, 224 Ladiges, Werner, 223 Lindzey, Gardner, 232 Kermode, Frank. 211 Laidler, Keith, 199, 205, Linn. Ian J., 94 Kessel, Edward L., 133, 225 Linnaeus, Carolus, 92, 143, 134, 135, 136,225 Lamb, Sidney M .. 70, 225 212 Kevelson, Roberta, 21, 93, Lana (primate), 92, 145, Lloyd, James, 129 225 194 Locke, John, 53 Kevles, Bettyann, 205 Lancy, David F .. 88, 89. Lodge, Sir , 100 Kimber, Rita, 220 225 Loeb, Arthur I., 18, 44, 226 Kimber, Robert, 220 Lanza, Robert P., 66. 220 Loftus, Elizabeth F., 159. Klaus, Georg, 66. 225 Larsen, Svend Erik, 178. 226 Kleinpaul, Rudolf. 46. 93, 225 Loizos, Caroline, 85, 224 225 Lassie (dog). 93 London, Jack, 5 Klingsberg. Cyrus. 151, 225 Laszlo, Erwin, 29. 226 Longair, Malcolm S., 217 Kloft, Werner, 144, 225 Latham, Robert G., 53, 226 Longuet-Higgins, H. c., Klopf, A. Harry, 31, 225 Laudan, L.. 25. 226 224 Knapp, Bettina. 103, 114. Lavers. Annette, 70, 226 Lorenz, Konrad, 140, 197, 225 La Violette. Paul A., 216 206,211,226 Koehler, Otto, 86, 197 Lawrence, Chnstopher, 58, Lotz, John (Janos), 68, 178, Koestler. Arthur, 29, 225 226 179, 180, 226 Kohler. Wolfgang, 209 Lawson, J .. 194,231 Lovejoy, Arthur 0.,27,226 242 INDEX OF NAMES

Lovelock, James E., II, 20, Maturana, H. R., 235 Morris (cat), 93 32, 33, 44, 75, 226, 227, Maximilian, Prince, 141 Morris, Charles W .. 62. 64. 235 Maxwell, Joseph, 100 66-67, 83, 159, 228. 232 Lowell, Percival, 4 Mayr, Ernst. 28, 228 Morris, Desmond, 154, 188, Lowengrub, Morton, XVI McCulloch, Warren S., 64 228 Lowery, Carol R., 233 McFarland, David, 139, Mounin, Georges, 46, 70, Lucas, George, 186 220, 222, 227 228 Lucas, J. R., 224 McFeely, Wilham S., 2, Muckensturm-Chauvin, Ber• Ludel, Jacquehne, 28, 227 227 nadette, 192, 218 Lumsden, Charles J., 32, McGuire, Michael T., 53, Mueller, Georg Elias. 106, 227 218 III, 228 Luria, Aleksandr R., 65 McKean, Kevin, 57, 227 MUller, Max, 206 Lydgate, John, 174 McLaughlin, Robert 1., 227 Muhamed (horse), 92, 103, McQuown, Norman A., 68 105, 106, 107, 108, 109. MacBryde, Cyril M., 46, Mead, George Herbert, 63 110, III 54, 227 Mead, Margaret, 72 Murasaki, Shuji, 119. 120 Mackenzie, William, 108 Mears, Clara, 88, 222 Murasaki. Yoshimasa. 121 Macveagh, Lincoln, 66 Mehl, Paul E., 207, 228 Murofushi, Kiyoko, 200 Maday, Stefan von, III, Meise, Wilhelm, 233 Myers. F. W H., 100 112, 227 Mendeleev, Dmitri Maeterlinck, Maurice, 97. Ivanovich, 16 Nakazawa, Shmichi. 119 99,100.101,103,104, Merchant, Carolyn, 25, 228 Narasimhan. Raghavan, 234 105, 106, 107, 108, 113. Merle, Robert, 204 Neelameghan. Ara- 114,227.235 Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, 61, shanapalal, 152, 228 Mahony, Patrick, 101. 102. 63, 228 Ne'eman, Yuval, 177.221 227 Merrell, Floyd. 41, 228 Neuberger. Max. 51, 52. Maini, Tidu, 151,217 Mertens, Robert. 132, 228 53. 228 Majno, Guido, 52, 227 Merton, Robert K., 108, Newman, John P .. I Makridakis, Spyros, 29, 227 228 Newton, Isaac, 200 Malinowski, Bronislaw, 63, Metternich, Pnnce, I Nicolis, GregOire, 37, 228, 227 Meyer, Nicholas, 178 230 Mallarme, Stephane, 115 Meyer-Holzapfel, Monika, Niethammer. Gunther. 233 Mann. Thomas, 206 85, 228 Nitecki, Matthew H .. 31. Mann, William N ,52,217 Millar, Susanna, 84, 86, 228 228 Maple, Terry L., 199,206, Miller, Benjamin F., 71, Nogar, Raymond J .. 34, 227 228 228, 229 Margalef, Ramon, 31, 227 Miller, Eugene S., 153,228 Norman, Colin, 151, 229 Margulis, Lynn, 10, II, 20, Miller, James Grier, 28, 228 Nutting. Charles C .. 141. 32, 33, 34, 42, 75, 184, Miller, Jessie L., 28, 228 142, 143. 229 227, 235, 236 Miller, Jonathan, 46, 50, Maritam, Jacques, 41, 227 55, 56, 228 Markl, Hubert, 231 Milton, John, 181 Odum, Howard T., 31. 229 Marler, Peter. 87 Minuchin, Salvador, 47, 226 Oehler, Klaus, 225 Marney, Milton, 28, 227 Mirbeau, Octave, 115 Ogden, Charles K., 7. 46. Marshall, Eliot, 151, 228 Mitchell, Robert W., 215 62, 63, 66, 78, 79, 99. Martinet, Andre, 41, 228 Mitty, Walter, 89 100, 229 Maruyama, Magoroh. 29, 3. Monod, Jacques, 190,223 Ogilvie, Cohn. 46. 218 228 Montagu, Ashley. 43, 228 Ohnukl-Tlemey, Emiko. xi. Marx, Jean L., 33, 228 Moore, Peter D., 38, 228 117, 119, 122, 123,229 Marx, Karl, 66 Morowitz, Harold J., 22, Onans, Gordon, 20, 229 Mathison, Melissa, 185, 187 233 Orwell, George. x, 229 INDEX OF NAMES 243

Osten, Wilhelm von, 104, Pitkin, Thomas M . 2, 230 Rletschel, Peter, 135,231 105, 108, 194,230 Pittendrigh, Colin S .. 28, Rifkin, Jeremy, 157, 171, Osten-Sacken, Carl R., 134, 230 231 135, 229 Pitts, Walter, 64 Ringsdorf, William. 56, 218 Overbye, Denms, 4, 229 Plato, 190 Ripley, S. Dillon, xiii, xv Pocock, R. I., 72 Rjeznikov, L 0.,66, 231 Page, Jack, 229 Poe, Edgar Allen, 175, 176, Roe, Ann, 230 Pagels, Heinz R., 178, 179, 182, 187 Rosenblatt, Jay S., 217 229 Poinsot, John, 21, 219, 230 Rosenthal, Robert, 4, 23, Paine, Robert, 54 Polunin, Ivan, 50, 230 43,65, 104, 195,223, Pandora, 168 Ponzio, Augusto, 66, 230 230, 232, 233 Panofsky, Dora, 168,229 Poppe, Nicholas, 226 Ross, Herbert, 178 Panofsky, Erwin, 168, 229 Posner, Roland, xi, 217, Rumbaugh, D. M., 191, Papini, Giovanni, 1m, 229 225, 226, 230 193, 194, 195, 196,200, Pattee, Howard H., 29, 37, Powell, Ralph Austin, 219, 231 229, 233 230 Ruppel, G., 126, 192,231 Patten, Bernard c., 22, 23, Premack, Ann J., 191, 198, Russell, Anthony, 21, 231 74, 229 205, 209, 210, 230 Russell, W. M. S., 128,218 Patterson, Francine, 198, Premack, David, 191, 197, Ryder, Richard D., 94 205, 206, 207, 208, 198, 199,209,210,218, 229 230 Sagan, Carl, 104, 231 Pavlov, Ivan Petrovich, 98 Prigogine, Ilya, 29, 37, 228, Sahal, Devendra, 28, 231 Peckham, Morse, 39, 229 230 Sandburg, Carl, 66 Peirce, Charles S., xi, xiii, Pringle, Peter, 168, 230 Sapir, Edward, 7, 69, 91. 2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 19, Pritchard, William T., 100, 231 21,27,40,49,50,54, 230 Sarah (primate), 92, 145 59,60,62,63,66-67, Prodi, Giorgio, ix, 46, 53, Sarton, George, 52, 53, 68, 69, 71, 73, 74, 75, 230 225, 231 76, 78, 80, 81, 91, 174, Prometheus, 168 Sartre, Jean-Paul, 9, 228 175, 176, 178. 179, 180, Proteus, 128 Saussure, Ferdinand de, 7, 181,182,184,222,225, Pryor, Karen, 230 21,67,68,69,78,231 229,230,231 Pythagoras, 175 Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S., Peng, Fred C. c., 89, 229 193, 194, 195, 196, 200, Pennycuick, C. J., 94 Ramsay, Alexandra, 73, 232 231 Percy, Walker, 18, 230 Ramsey, F. P., 79 Savan, David, 3, 231 Perrins, Christopher, 23, Randi, James, 99, 113,230 Sawyer, Jeffrey R., 236 234 Ransdell, Joseph, 17-18, Schaap, Ward B., XVI Perron, Paul, 18 19, 20, 21. 25, 26, 215, Schaller, Friedrich, 231 Peters, D. S., 28, 38, 230 230 Schaller, George B., 93 Petitto, Laura A., 192, 233 Rappoport, Roy A., 39, 231 Scharfe, Hartmut, 28, 231 Pfungst, Oskar, 98, 99, 104, Rathmayer, Werner, 231 Schechter, Bruce, 108, 231 108, 112, 147, 208, 230 Rauch, Irmengard, 219 Schiaparelli, Giovanni, 4 Phaedrus the Myrrhinusian, Raven, Peter H., 31, 220 Schiffrin, Deborah, 183 61 Reagan, Ronald, 149, 162 Schiller, Claire H., 235 Phillips, Eustace D., 52, Rey, Alain, 19, 231 Schiller, Friedrich von, 85, 230 Reynolds, Vernon, 191,231 91, 177 Philodemus, 52 Rhoades, David, 20, 229 Schjelderup-Ebbe, Thorlief, Piaget, Jean, 65, 89, 90, 91, Richards, Ivor A., 46, 62, 87, 231 92, 96, 225, 230 66, 79, 99, 100, 229 Schlegel, Friedrich von, 212 Pickering, J. W., 100 Richet, Charles, 103, 231 Schmandt-Besserat, Denise, Pimm, Stuart L., 22, 230 Ricoeur, Paul, 8, 231 167, 231 244 INDEX OF NAMES

Schmidt, Paul F., 28, 227 Simon, Herbert A .. 28. 37, Steiner, George. xii, 234 Schnelrla, Theodore c., 13, 233 Stengers, Isabelle. 29, 37, 231 Simpson. George Gaylord. 230 Schultz, Jack c., 20, 216. 230 Stokes, Adrian, 27, 234 231 Sinatra, Frank, 9 Stone, Barry. 235 Schulz, Charles, 5 Singer, Milton, 3, 8, 18, Stonehouse, Bernard, 23, Schuster. Peter, 220 233 93, 95, 234 Schwartz, Karlene V .. 32. Skinner. B. F., 64-65, 66, Stotz, Elmer H., 220 33, 227 184, 220, 233 Stumpf. Karl. 98. 99, 104. Scott. John Paul. 84, 88. Slatkin. Montgomery. 31, 108 232 221 Sudd, John H . 144, 234 Scruton, Roger, 19, 232 Siobodkin, L. B., 32, 41. Sullivan, Therese. 215 Sebeok. Jessica. 86 233 Swanson. Carl P., 31,234 Sebeok, Thomas A., viii. IX. Slud, Paul. 141. 142, 143, Sydenham, Thomas, 53, 226 xi, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 16, 17- 233 Symons, Juhan. 182. 234 18,19,20,21,22,23, Smith, Charles J .. 31. 233 25,27.31. 37, 39, 41. Smith, S. T., 194,231 Tattersall, Ian. 38. 220 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50, Smith, Temple F., 22, 233 Tax, Sol, 221. 235 51. 53, 56, 57, 58. 59, Smith, W. John, 87 Tegneer, Esalas, 180 60. 62, 63, 64. 65, 67, Smuts, Jan Christian. 28. Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre. 69. 70, 71, 72, 73, 74. 233 31, 234 77.78.82,84,85,87. Snow, David W , 143, 233 Teixera de Mattos. Alex• 90. 91. 94, 104, 108. Snow, Sir Charles Percy, ander. 99, 227 III. 114, 135, 139. 143. 26,81,233 Temerhn, Maruice K .. 205. 144.162,164. 177. 180, Snowdon. Charles T., 88. 234 182,184, 190, 191, 192, 233 Temkin, Oswei, 51. 52, 234 193,195. 196, 198. 199. Snyder. C. R .. 4. 233 Tennyson, Alfred. 9 200,215,216.219,220. Snyder, Paul, 24, 234 Terrace. Herbert S .. 191. 221, 223, 225, 226, 231. Socrates. 9. 46. 53 199, 203. 205. 206, 234 232, 233, 234, 235 Sokolov, Raymond. 203 Tesla. Nikola, 175 Seidenberg, Mark S., 192, Sommerfelt, Alf, 68 Therien, Gilles, viii. 234 233 Southwood, T R. E .. 94 Thorn, Rene, 3. 25, 28, 29. Seielstad, George A .. 75, Spencer-Brown, G. (a.k.a. 37, 50, 60. 70, 73, 74, 233 J ames Keys), 27, 234 81, 181. 234 Shands, Harley c., 47, 97. Spielberg, Steven, ix. 185, Thomas, Edward, 97, 100, 233 186, 187 101, 235 Shank, Gary D., 20. 233 Spigelman. James, 168, 230 Thomas. LeWIS. II. 75. 235 Shanon. Benny. 33, 233 SpIlteler, Carl F. G., 99 Thompson, John N., 31, Shapiro, Fred C .. 150, 233 Spuhler. James N., 41. 234 235 Shapiro, Gary, 199 Staal, 1. F .. 72, 234 Thompson. Michael. 25. 38. Shapiro, Michael, 68, 69. StaIano, Kathryn Vance, 46, 235 233 48,49. 234 Thompson. Nicholas. 215 Shapiro, Robert, 165. 220 StamslavskI, Konstantin, Thorpe, Wilham H .. 87. Shelley, Mary. 204 115 211 Shenkel, Randee Jae, 233 Stankiewicz. Edward. 7. 234 Thullier. Pierre, 38. 235 Sherman, Wilham. 54 Stapledon, Olaf. 5 Timaeus. Ernst. 104. 235 Sherzer. Joel, 71, 233 Starr, Thomas B., 22. 37. Timmermans. Bcrnardus. Shklovsky, Victor, 6 215 100. 235 Sick, Helmut. 143, 233 Steen, Peter, 170, 224 Tomkins. Gordon W • 29. Siegel, Rudolf E , 53, 233 Stein, Gertrude, 6 33. 40. 235 Silver (horse), 93 Steinbacher, Joachim, 233 Trabant. Jurgen, 70. 219 INDEX OF NAMES 245

Uchida, Hiroyasu, 117 Waldrop, M. Michell, x, Williams, Brooke, 18, 236 Uexkiill, Jakob von, 3, 4, 235 Wilson, Edward 0.,32,84, 13, 21, 22, 23, 27, 65, Wall, Bernard, 234 87,88, 135, 144,213, 67, 73, 74, 80, 138, 139, Walker, G L., 35, 217 227, 236 140, 165. 200, 210, 211, Wartofsky, Max W., 228 Winance, Eleuthere, 21, 236 212, 235 Washoe (primate), 92, 145 Winkler, Ruthild, 37, 220 Uexktill, Thure von, 6, 13, Watson, Andrew, 32, 235 Winograd, Isaac J., 151, 17,21,22,47-48,54, Waugh, Linda R., 48, 181, 236 73, 215, 225, 235 224, 235 Wittgenstein, Ludwig, 79 Ullman, 1. M., 65, 235 Wechsler, Judith, 25, 236 Woese, Carl R., 20, 33, Ullman, Stephen, 45, 235 Weigin, Xie, 41, 236 236 Umiker-Sebeok, Jean, xii, Weiner, Herbert, 235 Wolff, Albert, 101 20, 23, 43, 59, 73, 108, Weiss, Paul, 229 Wood, Frederick Adams, 111,190.191,193,198, Welby, Lady Victoria, 4, 174 200,221,233,235 73,78, 176,222 Wordsworth, William, 181 Uribe, R., 235 Welby, Sir Charles, 63 Wrolstad, Merald E., 221 Wells, H. G., 186 Wundt, Heinz, 231 van Lawick-Goodall, Jane, Wells, Rulon, xi, 68, 236 93 Wesley, James Paul, 35, Yamaguchi, Masao, 119, Van Lerberghe, Charles, 115 236 232 van Schooneveld, C. H., Wheeler, John Archibald, Yates, F. Eugene, 40, 77, 220 II, 76, 77, 236 236 Varela, F. G., 31, 235 Whitfield, Francis J., 69 Yepifanovsky, Mikolai Verne, Jules, 186 Whitman, C. 0., 196 Ivanovich, 146 Vidal, Gore, ix, 235 Whitney, William Dwight, Young, J. Z., 74 Voegelin, Carl F., 68, 226 69 Yunis, Jorge J., 190, 196, Vrba, Elisabeth S., 15,40, Whittaker, R. H., 20, 32, 236 222 33, 34, 236 Vygotsky, Lev Semenovich, Wickler, Wolfgang, 129, 65 236 Zareckij, A., 8 Wiener, Norbert, 171, 236 Zarif (horse), 92, 103 Waal, Frans B M. de, 28, Wilberforce. Bishop, 196 Zayan, R. C., 85 235 Wilden, Anthony, 29, 236 Zeleny, Milan, 29, 37, 236 Wachtel, Paul, 189, 235 Wiley, E. 0., 37, 236 Zeus, 168 Waddington, C. H., 34, 37, Will, Manlyn Major, 3, 236 Zumpt, Fritz, 231 223,224,227,228,235 Willey, BaSil, 62 ZurStrassen, Richard, 231